or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0 - Page 16

post #751 of 2187

I've said it before...I think that Jon Stewart is burned out. He (and his staff) are still really great at what they do but having to deal with negativity present in politics and the media's coverage of it 24/7...it has to end up taking a toll psychologically. 

I can't help but wonder if Stephen Colbert has the perfect answer: create a 'character' to inhabit for a couple hours and then when it's over you take off the 'costume' and go back to real life ??

 

To echo what I've said before, I think that much of the "news" media is more concerned with 'scandal' and 'being first' instead of truth and fact. There are a few exceptions but they are a minority and are being drowned out by the voices of immediacy.

All this negativity toward government is playing right into the Norquist-ian mentality of "government=bad, freemarket=good".

The idea that government being a force for good is being attacked, intentionally in some cases and incidentally in others.

 

I think that JS taking a break this summer in order to direct a movie serves two purposes. It allows him to fulfill his creative side, but more importantly it's giving him a break from doing a nightly show.  

post #752 of 2187

from Charles Pierce/Esquire

 

Washington's Political Circus Is Not An Accident

 

<excerpt>

Quote:

We are now entering the we're-all-just-feathers-in-the-wind period of scandal coverage in Washington. The courtier press has decided that Washington "has turned into" a political circus, as if the process were a passing thunderstorm or an implacable seismic event. There was another story, this one from Buzzfeed, that played the same tune on the same old tin piano.

 

Congress is currently obsessed with both stories, and political operatives are already lining up to talk about how they'll influence the 2014 midterm election and Obama's political power.  

 

"Congress" is not obsessed with both stories. Opportunistic weasels are obsessed with both stories — and, oddly, more obsessed with the fanciful B, B!. B! than with the IRS malfeasance, for which the agency already has apologized, and on which the agency blew the whistle on itself.

 

Obama's IRS answer probably won't satisfy Republicans demanding a public apology from the president and insisting the story indicates Obama's White House is run like Nixon's. But the president put himself on the same page with elected officials of all political stripes Monday who demanded to know more about what happened at the IRS and the firing of those responsible for any malfeasance.    
post #753 of 2187

I love Charlie Pierce and he completely nailed it in that column.

 

Jon Stewart completely lost me.  I watch occasionally now, but just the other night he went off on how the right wing conspiracy theories are right about the Tea Party and the IRS rather than waiting until there was a little more clarity and then making an actual point rather than pandering to the "both sides" crowd with a stale joke.  Stewart still has his moments, but Colbert's show analysis and commentary are superior in every way. 

 

ETA:  Chaz, I think Obama lost him a while ago.  I remember in the run up to the election, Obama was on, and Stewart was completely confrontational and hostile to him.  Then the great reporter Tim Weiner was on and had to correct Stewart about Obama being worse than Bush, or a continuation of Bush.  In other words, Jon Stewart isn't a fan and hasn't been for a while. 

post #754 of 2187

With respect to JS, I don't think that he was actually saying that the Tea Party was right about all their conspiracy theories but that all these media propped-up, so-called scandals are allowing the Tea Party to justify and re-invigorate their overly simplistic (childish) ideology.

 

We were >< this close to finally marginalizing their silly conspiracy theories, but now they think they have "proof" that all the shit they believe about "the government taking their freedom" has been validated.

 

It should also be noted that the GOP/conservatives would love nothing more that to marginalize Colbert and Stewart. I can't help but think that the meme about "Stewart's Cronkite moment" is something that the rightwing media will latch onto and encourage. I've already seen posts on articles from so-called political "centrists" pushing this idea.     

post #755 of 2187

and then there's this...

 

post #756 of 2187
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTRan View Post

and then there's this...

 

 

I vehemently disagree with pretty much everything he stands for, but that's just... adorable?  Particularly his pronunciations of wikipedia and automobile.  Newt, it's called a smartphone, and clean your screen.

post #757 of 2187

3 words for Newt "early onset dementia"

 

speaking of politics... :)

 

There has been a show on PBS recently.  "Constitution USA w/ Peter Sagal"

 

I caught a bit of episode 2 last night. It's online.

 

http://www.pbs.org/tpt/constitution-usa-peter-sagal/watch/its-a-free-country/

Quote:

Ask Americans what the Constitution’s most important feature is, and most will say it’s the guarantees of liberty enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments of the Constitution.

Americans are fiercely proud of their freedoms but they continue to argue about what those basic rights are and how they can be sustained in a changing world. Are our rights unchangeable, or should they evolve over time? What is the proper role for the courts in interpreting rights?

In this hour, Peter explores the history of the Bill of Rights, and why each was included. He’ll look at several important rights cases in American history, involving freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to legal counsel, cases that have expanded or enforced basic liberties. He’ll also learn how technology, particularly the internet is challenging our right to privacy.

 

There are a couple good segments in this episode.

post #758 of 2187

It would be nice if the administration just ignored all of these sideshows and cut straight to the heart of the matter:

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/13/1208905/-Here-s-how-the-IRS-scandal-could-cost-Uncle-Sam-billions

 

They should just say that OK, we're not going to raise tax rates anymore. However, what we're going to do is make sure everyone is paying the tax they're supposed to be paying and not dodging it. Then they need to hammer that point over and over again.

 

The point really has to be driven home that for every dollar spent on the IRS gets returned many times over (obviously there's a limit but lets face it, they're nowhere near that point yet). Every time the Republicans try to stop them, just bluntly ask the rhetorical question as to why the Republicans object to people paying the tax they're already meant to be paying?*

 

(*Well, we all know why but for the sake of argument ...)

 

Key quotes:

 

"The Internal Revenue Service can't keep up with surging tax cheating and isn't sufficiently collecting revenue or helping confused taxpayers because Congress isn't giving it enough money to do its job, a government watchdog said Wednesday...

Congress cut the IRS budget to $11.8 billion this year. That is $300 million less than last year and $1.5 billion below the request by President Barack Obama, who argued that boosting the agency's spending would fatten tax collections and provide better service to taxpayers."

...

"Converting dollar bills into $10 bills is an excellent way to pay off your credit card. Except, it seems, if you're a House Republican...

As the Associated Press reported, "every dollar the Internal Revenue Service spends for audits, liens and seizing property from tax cheats brings in more than $10, a rate of return so good the Obama administration wants to boost the agency's budget." It's an easy way to reduce the deficit: You don't have to cut heating oil for the poor or Pell grants for students. You just have to make people pay what they owe."

The report points out that the IRS functions as the "accounts receivable" department of the federal government, as it collects more than 90 percent of all federal revenue and therefore provides the funds that make almost all other federal spending possible. On a budget of $12.1 billion, the IRS collected $2.42 trillion in FY 2011. In other words, for every $1 that Congress appropriated for the IRS, the IRS collected about $200 in return. However, current federal budgeting rules do not take into account that a dollar appropriated for the IRS typically generates substantially more than a dollar in additional tax collections, leaving the agency substantially underfunded to do its job and limiting its ability to close the tax gap and thereby help reduce the federal budget deficit.

"The report points out that the size of the tax gap raises important equity concerns, because compliant taxpayers end up carrying a disproportionate share of the tax burden. For 2001, the most recent year for which a complete tax gap estimate existed when the report was written, the IRS estimated it was unable to collect $290 billion in taxes. Since there were then 108 million households in the United States, the average household paid a "noncompliance surtax" of almost $2,700 to enable the federal government to raise the same revenue it would have collected if all taxpayers had reported their income and paid their taxes in full. "That is not a burden we should expect our nation's taxpayers to bear lightly," the report says. [Last week, the IRS released updated tax gap estimates. For 2006, the IRS estimated it was unable to collect $385 billion in taxes when there were 114 million households, producing an updated "noncompliance surtax" of nearly $3,400 per household.]"

...

"Over the last five years, officials at both the I.R.S. and the Treasury have told Congress that cheating among the highest-income Americans is a major and growing problem."

...

 

Really, they need to push hard over increasing funding for the IRS while at the same time using the fact that if the Republicans keep trying to block funding increases to the IRS as a cudgel to beat them over the head with about how they want to help rich people evade taxes at the expense of the poor.

post #759 of 2187

The thing is that there are those of the GOP/conservative/libertarian mindset that want the IRS to fail and be dissolved completely.

Just as they are responsible for trying to kill the US Postal Service by playing around with how it's financed, they are trying to do the same with the IRS.

 

-cut funding so they can't do their jobs properly

-point out how inefficient and irresponsible they do their job.

-use this as an excuse to further dismantle it.

-privatize it

post #760 of 2187

I thought this was pretty funny...

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/16/1209610/-House-GOP-leadership-wastes-some-more-time-on-repeal

 

 

and some of the responses (summarized for ease of reading)

 

-Even covers car-thieves

-Still not repealed

-Preexisting conditions covered?

-Lower cost prescriptions

-perverse GOP obsession

-Mitt Romney's plan.

-Because four words is too complex for republicans

-Weepy Orange Drunk

 

Quote:

 

 

I also saw this one over on VF

 

Quote:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/eichenwald/2013/05/gop-obama-care-in-three-words-twitter

 

I have coverage #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Uninsured won't die #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Joining western world #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Sick children covered #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Sick get insurance #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Cuts infant mortality #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Caring for vulnerable #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Coverage for kids #ObamaCareInThreeWords
No insurance caps #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Unnecessary deaths decreased #ObamaCareInThreeWords
End of selfishness? #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Getting my point? #ObamaCareInThreeWords
 
Democracy in action #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Endless GOP lies #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Inspires GOP delusions #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Human decency prevailed #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Americans care again #ObamaCareInThreeWords
GOP cant repeal #ObamaCareInThreeWords
It's the law #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Obama won reelection #ObamaCareInThreeWords
GOP wasting time #ObamaCareInThreeWords
37 pointless repeals. #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Obama pwned GOP #ObamaCareInThreeWords
GOP temper tantrum #ObamaCareInThreeWords
America is better #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Ridiculous GOP antics #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Tea party ignorance #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Same as Romneycare #ObamaCareInThreeWords
 
GOP opposed Medicare #ObamaCareInThreeWords
GOP opposed SSI #ObamaCareInThreeWords
Same with Obamacare #ObamaCareInThreeWords

post #761 of 2187

 So Issa thinks that spending money to improve security for the State Department is wasteful, but goofing off on twitter isn't. What a tool.

post #762 of 2187
Without naming names (yet), CBS News is now saying that the email that sparked the Benghazi "scandal" was forged by GOP operatives.
post #763 of 2187

That has to be the funniest twist to this whole Benghazi debacle.

post #764 of 2187

The longer all this crap goes on, the more I start to hear this in my head...

 

post #765 of 2187

...fuckin' A

 

from VF

 

Quote:

The Real IRS Scandal That No One Is Talking About

 

I’m not all that outraged that the I.R.S. held up applications by Tea Party groups for tax-exempt status. I’m outraged that any of them—or their liberal counterparts—qualify for that status at all.

 

Unfortunately, given the way this I.R.S. scandal slid so easily into ideological definitions, I fear that few non-politicos are recognizing the real disgrace here: that the federal government—Congress, the White House, the tax agency, and the Supreme Court—has created a situation where blatantly political organizations are able to legally break the law by pretending they’re something that they’re not.

 

The key to this obscene state of affairs is an entity known as a 501(c)(4), named for the section of the tax code that created it. Supposedly, these are civic associations or organizations devoted to social welfare, which can operate tax-free, but whose donors aren’t allowed to deduct their contributions. Fair enough.

 

But then comes the loopholes that politicos have used to drive not only a truck through the intention of the law but a whole fleet. Unlike a wholly charitable organization, a 501(c)(4) can engage in political activities, so long as it is not its primary purpose. In other words, I could form an organization that spends 49.99999 percent of its time, energy, and money on politics and still be deemed tax exempt. In other words, you, me—every American citizen—can be providing a tax subsidy to groups that (theoretically) are spending almost half of their money on politics. It’s worse than that. Under the law, a 501(c)(4) can spend an unlimited amount of money on lobbying, so long as it is related to its “primary purpose.” So, in truth, an organization can be fully political under any rational interpretation of the meaning of that word, yet be deemed not to be primarily political under the law.

 

The floodgates for this disgusting arrangement were largely opened—like almost all things that have perverted modern American democracy—from the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission. This is the case where the Supreme Court ruled that corporations, associations, and labor unions have the right to invest unlimited amounts of money in political campaigns under the specious idea that they held the same rights to free speech that individuals do. In other words, that those entities with cash—that don’t even have the right to cast a ballot—get to be heard more on political issues than individual voters do. While they can’t give money to specific candidates, they can do whatever they want to support them so long as they act independently.

 

Some commentators and politicos—almost all Republicans—hailed the decision as a victory for free speech, one that would improve the system. “There will certainly be campaign abuses, as there are now, and many will not be happy with the court’s ruling,” Ed Rollins, a longtime G.O.P. political consultant, said at the time. “But the full disclosure law lets you know who is doing what and that’s a good thing.”

 

Yah, right. Add in the 501(c)(4) rules, and you don’t get to know what anyone is doing. Citizens United specified that 501(c)(4)s could make expenditures in political races, so long as they meet the “primary purpose” standard. And while these organizations have to disclose the money they spent, they don’t have to say anything about who donated it. So, if Joe the Multibillionaire wants to have greater say in the direction of our political system than any other individual, he could legally launder $500 million through a 501(c)(4), which then spends $249.999 million on political races, and another couple of hundred million on lobbying, grass-roots organizing, etc.

 

<cont>

post #766 of 2187

This is spot on.  I'm hoping and praying that this "scandal" opens up some real scrutiny on these groups, and an end to this odious scam.

post #767 of 2187

Is anyone surprised...?

 

Quote:

Conservative Advice To GOP: Don't Legislate, Focus On Scandals

 

Heritage Action, the political activist offshoot of the conservative Heritage Foundation, has some advice for House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor: focus on the scandals plaguing the Obama administration and stay away from legislation that could "highlight major schisms" within the House Republican Conference.

 

In a to the leaders, Heritage Action CEO Michael Needham says "outrage over Benghazi" and the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups has "rightly focused the nation's attention squarely on the actions of the Obama administration." The letter goes on to say the House must continue holding oversight hearings, "but it would be imprudent to do anything that shifts the focus from the Obama administration to the ideological differences within the House Republican Conference."

 

The letter specifically mentions the Internet sales tax bill (which recently passed the Senate with lots of Republican support) and the farm bill (the Senate is working through it now and is likely to pass it soon). Needham says both bills, which House conservatives dislike, could prompt the press to write another " 'circular firing squad' article."

 

"Rather than scheduling such legislation for consideration, we urge you to keep the attention focused squarely on the Obama administration," Needham wrote in summation.

 

One might ask why Boehner and Cantor would even think about taking advice from a group that at times has worked at agenda. But Boehner's spokesman didn't take the bait, choosing not to comment on the Heritage Action letter.

 

The Speaker has made it clear he thinks the House can and should walk and chew gum at the same time. On the investigations, he said at a news conference Thursday: "When you're trying to seek the truth, and if that is the goal to seek the truth, there is no line." That is, no line where they risk taking the investigations too far, .

 

And Boehner said he doesn't think these investigations would get in the way of the House legislative agenda. "We've got a job here to legislate," he said at his on-camera Q&A Thursday. "We're trying to do everything to create jobs and we're going to continue to do everything we can to do that."

 

Next week the House is expected to consider a bill dealing with student loan interest rates and a measure that would approve construction of the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline.

 

 

http://heritageaction.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/20130516-Heritage-Action-re-oversight.pdf

post #768 of 2187

Here is a troubling thought I just had. What if the GOP use the scandals to pressure Obama to sign off on the Keystone Pipeline and it works.

post #769 of 2187
Environmentalists are fighting the President over the pipeline as it is, probably in vain. If anything, I'd expect the GOP to scuttle the pipeline just to keep the conservative Democrats from being able to say they could produce results for their campaign contributors in the petroleum cartel.
post #770 of 2187

"hey....maybe it wasn't a good idea to store so much fertilizer so close to a bunch of houses and a school....??"

 

Given that many in this country only seems to learn from avoidable mistakes, it's going to take an accident occurring on a completed Keystone pipeline in order for anyone to realize that "maybe that wasn't a good idea." 

 

related:

A Black Mound of Canadian Oil Waste Is Rising Over Detroit

post #771 of 2187

This sums up congress rather simply....

 

video at link

Quote:

Journalist explains how utter lack of expertise in Congress is ruining America

 

For his new book, journalist Robert Kaiser intensely researched the political maneuvering surrounding the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. His conclusion? Most members of Congress don’t understand what they’re arguing about.

 

Speaking on PBS, Kaiser said Wall Street reform only occurred in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse thanks to the unique talents of former Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and former Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT).

 

Unlike the rest of Congress, Frank and Dodds had an actual grasp on the financial situation and understood the need to act. Frank provided the brainpower, while Dodds’ political skill was necessary for financial reform to pass.

 

“But it was upsetting to me as a citizen to realize how few members understood the issues they were dealing with,” Kaiser remarked. “These are, of course, extremely complicated financial matters, how banks work, how they’re regulated, so on.”

 

“Not everybody can know this, but at the end, I concluded that you could fit the number of experts in Congress on financial issues easily onto the roster of a Major League Baseball team,” he added. “That’s 25 people. I think that is the max.”

 

Kaiser also said the lack of expertise was resulting in a deadlocked Congress. Rather than trying to craft meaningful legislation to aid the country, most lawmakers were more interested in scoring partisan political points.

 

“You don’t really engage on issues in this Congress,” he explained. “What you engage in is political warfare, partisan bashing, one or the other. And the result is that serious policy issues, as we have seen again and again, get very short shrift.”

 

post #772 of 2187
post #773 of 2187

Off to her new Fox News show, presumably.  Or a hole in the ground, preferably.  

post #774 of 2187

I think she wants to spend more time acting completely insane with her family. Also, she's always been curious about her husband's bible study classes that seem to entirely consist of attractive young men.

post #775 of 2187
Ha she's probably too scared she'll lose next election after last years close call. Honestly good riddance to bad rubbish. Now only if we can get Louis Gohmert can quit too.
post #776 of 2187
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaylaisMagic View Post

Ha she's probably too scared she'll lose next election after last years close call. Honestly good riddance to bad rubbish. Now only if we can get Louis Gohmert can quit too.

 

...and Steve King and Darrell Issa and Rick Perry and James Inhofe and Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan and Sam Brownback and Jim DeMint and Scott Walker and.....

post #777 of 2187

I just caught part of Michele Bachman's 'concession' speech....in light of a recent Veep episode, I found it hilarious that MB used the "R" word- "robustly".

post #778 of 2187

A not surprising report on the state of the GOP from the College Republican National Committee.

 

IMO, there is also a huge degree of willful denial in there as well.

 

 

Quote:

Report: How GOP lost young voters

 

A new postmortem on the November elections from the nation’s leading voice for college Republicans offers a searing indictment of the GOP “brand” and the major challenges the party faces in wooing young voters, according to a copy given exclusively to POLITICO on Sunday.

 

The College Republican National Committee on Monday made public a detailed report — the result of extensive polling and focus groups — dissecting what went wrong for Republicans with young voters in the 2012 elections and how the party can improve its showing with that key demographic in the future.

 

It’s not a pretty picture. In fact, it’s a “dismal present situation,” the report says.

 

The 95-page study, which looked at the party’s views on social and economic issues, as well as its messaging and outreach, echoes a March report on the election debacle issued by Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, which presented a devastating assessment of the party’s current state of affairs.

 

But in some ways the new report from inside the GOP tent is even more scathing and ominous — since it comes from the party’s next generation.

 

Titled the “Grand Old Party for a Brand New Generation,” the report is sharply critical of the GOP on several fronts. The study slams some Republicans’ almost singular focus on downsizing Big Government and cutting taxes; candidates’ use of offensive, polarizing rhetoric; and the party’s belly-flop efforts at messaging and outreach, even as the report presents a way forward and, at times, strikes an optimistic tone.

 

In the report, the young Republican activists acknowledge their party has suffered significant damage in recent years. A sampling of the critique on:

 

Gay marriage: “On the ‘open-minded’ issue … [w]e will face serious difficulty so long as the issue of gay marriage remains on the table.”

 

Hispanics: “Latino voters … tend to think the GOP couldn’t care less about them.”

 

Perception of the party’s economic stance: “We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer you a hand to help you get there.”

 

Big reason for the image problem: The “outrageous statements made by errant Republican voices.”

 

Words that up-for-grabs voters associate with the GOP: “The responses were brutal: closed-minded, racist, rigid, old-fashioned.

 

I don't know how the GOP can change seeing as all the things they need to change are at the core of it's beliefs.


Edited by VTRan - 6/4/13 at 9:14am
post #779 of 2187

Tonight on All In, Chris Hayes had a woman on who is a college Republican. She tried to spin the report by saying the youth just don't understand that all the GOP wants to do is lower taxes for small business. Hayes pointed out that on the campaign trail, that is all Romney talked about.

post #780 of 2187

Oh lord, put me in cryogenics for fifty years and let me come out to a better world. Science is great, but god, if they would just stop living so god damn long, maybe the young Republicans (who may actually have some non-racist, homophobic ideas) could actually get a foothold. Until then, where's my freeze tube?

 

Quote:
“We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer you a hand to help you get there.”

 

I think that absolutely nails it on the head right there. Shit, this should be on a poster.

post #781 of 2187

Not really a surprise but...just when you thought he was already a huge asshole, he turns around and raises (lowers?) the bar.

 

Scott Walker Endorses Mandating Transvaginal Ultrasounds And Shutting Down Abortion Clinics

 

 

If anyone tries to draw equivalences between the Dems and GOP, remember that this is the kind of shit that the GOP would love to mandate on a federal level.

post #782 of 2187

Hey America, remember what happened the last time the States thought they could nullify any federal law they chose? Oh wait, they don't because the education system is horrendous.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/federal-nullification-efforts-mounting-states-070843059.html

post #783 of 2187

Wisconsin, Ohio, Texas.....

 

GOP- "if we can't get the White House, we'll just have to destroy the country from the bottom up."

 

Controversial Abortion Restrictions Get Premlinary Approval in Texas House

 

New GOP proposals seek restrictions on abortions

post #784 of 2187

I have to think that this shit will eventually backlash on them. It can't go on like this.

 

Right?
 

post #785 of 2187

Look the Crazy Repubs have spent decades taking over State and Local governments. With no opposition from "normals" or the Left. So why are we surprised that they can now implement their agenda?

post #786 of 2187

It seems like no matter how mad regular citizens get at their hijinks, when elections come along, dark money gets poured into advertising and marketing and they end up voting for the same awful douchebags they always do.
 

post #787 of 2187

All the money in the world wouldn't matter if people got off their asses and voted.

 

Ross Perot spent all kinds of money in two Presidential elections and didn't get elected. Arianna Huffington's (then) hubby spent millions and couldn't get into Congress. Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina also spent millions to be Governor of California, and got laughed at.

 

I think this excuse that the Bad Guys have all the moneyz just doesn't wash.

post #788 of 2187

Maybe, except that all of those were bad campaigns.  Money alone can't win.  You need brains and strategy.   ALEC is very good at flying in under the radar with legislation, and winning.
 

post #789 of 2187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

All the money in the world wouldn't matter if people got off their asses and voted.

 

Ross Perot spent all kinds of money in two Presidential elections and didn't get elected. Arianna Huffington's (then) hubby spent millions and couldn't get into Congress. Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina also spent millions to be Governor of California, and got laughed at.

 

I think this excuse that the Bad Guys have all the moneyz just doesn't wash.

 

Unfortunately, when it comes to Fiorina and Whitman, the main factor in their losing was that it was liberal CA.  This, and the fact that the GOP was pretty toxic + too many years of Schwarzenegger helped to sour the GOP brand as well here in CA.

If either of them were to run anywhere else in the mid/southwest, they could have won easily. 

 

It's true that money can only get you so far in politics if your message is weak, but if all your politician buddies have already extensively gerrymandered the state, a lot of money won't be necessary.

post #790 of 2187
Never underestimate our collective ability, as Americans, to despise one another and let ourselves be divided.
post #791 of 2187
Oh please you guys really don't get how pervasive money is in politics. To get anything done you need Money. Basically the government will only do anything if they get legal bribes aka donations for their next election that they will skim off the top to be put in their pockets. It's been documented that elected officials in Washington don't even read the bills that much anymore they have to fundraise all the time essentially that's all they do apart from show up on television.

It's kind of gross how scummy our political system is. People like Koch Brothers or Big Oil will always win over their opponents because they have the most money. You think elections matter? Ha that's funny! It doesn't really because the corporations win either way sure maybe they'll get a little more from the GOP but they'll still make out like bandits from the Democrats. So in short we're fucked!
post #792 of 2187

Part of what the Koch brothers and Big Oil bankroll is the promulgation of this idea of "either way, we're fucked."  It's actually not true, but it benefits big business for you to think it is.

post #793 of 2187

After reading some comments out there on the interwebs, I think that this is the only logical reason that some people are still supporting the GOP.

 

Quote:

Stockholm syndrome

 

Stockholm syndrome, or capture–bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI's Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[3]

 

Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes “strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other.”[4] One commonly used hypothesis to explain the effect of Stockholm syndrome is based on Freudian theory. It suggests that the bonding is the individual’s response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be a threat.[5]

 

  

   biggrin.gif

post #794 of 2187

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/darrell_issas_credibility_is_over/

Hopefully no one will ever listen to him again. Since Cheney and McCain still get interview time, I doubt it.

post #795 of 2187
Please let this happen this would be so funny! Take your fellow loons like Cruz, Ryan, Paul, Gohmert, Issa and Broun. In what alternate world does she live in? the GOP have done nothing but pander to "conservatives" . And using Lincoln's name? stop it! You lost the right to reference Lincoln in the sixties when the Republicans started the Southern Strategy and still use it to this day, Lincoln would be disgusted in you GOP! They should do what Lincoln would do and appeal to sensible members in thr opposition and independents to unite the country not launch ridiclous hate rhetoric!

Actually on second thought leave the country first and go to Somalia I think your policies you'd fit in much better there! The GOP needs a purge and the social conservatives need to go if they ever want to be in power again. Freedom Party? Lol!

http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/29/sarah-palin-floats-idea-of-leaving-republican-party-video/#ixzz2Xosj06uG
post #796 of 2187

That would be pretty damn funny to see all the fringe GOP bail on the 'mainstream' (?) GOP.  I bet there are a bunch of GOPers that would love to cut them adrift.

 

But...part of me wants the GOP to be saddled with them though. 

 

"Hey, GOP...you created the Fundamentalist Frankensteins, you have to live with them....if they drag the party down into nonexistence, so be it."

 

This might be the only way for more rational heads to prevail.

 

 

That being said, I don't think that the GOP (old or new versions) have anything to 'bring to the table' with regards to making this country better, so...

post #797 of 2187
Sarah Palin is such an empty, contentless, walking rorschach test that it would be interesting to see who follows her wherever she goes. Who in the GOP's Venn Diagram of Evil doesn't feel that the party is representing them? The racists? The Supreme Court just enabled the reinstatement of Jim Crow at every ballot box south of the Mason-Dixon Line. The theocrats? Multiple states are managing to pass horrifying antiabortion bills that are designed to provoke lawsuits which would lead to the Supreme Court redeciding Roe v. Wade. The tough talking fake secessionists and climate science denying industry shills on the "small government" side of things? GOP obstructionism in the federal legislature since 2008 has been historic in scope.

Maybe she can be the First Lady of Glenn Beck's apocalyptic commune, Vault 101 Independence. That's still happening, isn't it? That was in no way a scheme to grift millions in donations from aspiring compound cult members, correct?

_
Edited by Reasor - 7/1/13 at 8:33pm
post #798 of 2187
I feel it would take 10-25% of the party. I think it's inevitable for the Social Conservatives to either leave or die out entirely. Depending on how strong they can swing people away from the GOP to their American Christian Taliban Party. I feel this could happen eventually as it is the moderates and the Tea Party are in a death spiral civil war. The best thing for the party would be a political divorce. Boy if nothing else it would fun watching this political triple threat drama between Democrats, GOP and TEA party. It would be fun anyway.
post #799 of 2187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

Sarah Palin is such an empty, contentless, walking rorschach test that it would be interesting to see who follows her wherever she goes.
_

 

Eh I'd do her.

post #800 of 2187

Problem with the GOP "splintering" is, it's the fringe Right that is in control of the party, especially at the grass roots. If you are a GOP Congressman and you breath a word about passing real Immigration Reform or Abortion rights you will face a shit storm from your home base. (Look at what happened to Rubio when he decided to help Immigration reform happen).

Ironically it's the national level GOP that still retains a semblance of moderation.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0