Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Future of the Republicans; Will they implode ?
Topic Started: Nov 5 2008, 11:29 PM (276 Views)
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Minuet
Nov 6 2008, 03:54 PM
Ok let's straighten out the misperceptions here.

Dwayne - I only agreed with the statement I quoted. It was completely separate from the comment I clearly made to Admiralbill about Sarah Palin. I never meant to say that you agreed with me with regards to Palin.

And I do know who Sarah Palin is - that is a ridiculous statement for you to make. Always trying to make those whom you don't agree with look stupid. The inability to speak to people with common curtesy and decency hurts your reputation, not the reputation of those you attack unfairly.

Now - on to the exit poll that Dandandat mentioned. I don't see this as proving anything. All it proves is that Palin was able to get the vote from those who were socially conservative. They voted for McCain because of her - no doubt. My point is that there were not enough of those people to pull off a win. Going after the socially conservative crowd did not help McCain. It hurt him. Had he stayed true to his own path the result might have been different. From what I saw in the commentary here over the last few months there were a lot of people from the more liberal side of the spectrum who cheered the nomination of McCain. Many seriously considered voting for him. Until he chose Palin. That turned a lot of people away from him. And I am willing to bet that choice affected a lot of people who were "undecided" until late in the game.

AB - he may not have stated he made the choice to go after the female votes - but that doesn't negate the possiblity that this was part of the reason. I do agree that he was after the conservative base - absolutely. But that was a miscalculation on his part. A better choice for VP and he could have taken it. The conservative vote was already his due to the view of Obama as far too left wing. He never needed to pander to the conservative constituency and choosing to do so was a mistake.
There were many of the conservative base who were going to "stay home" and not vote. Happens often. The "I know we'll lose but I have my principles" voters.

It was their protest.

Palin got a lot of them excited again. She is part of the future of the party. People LIKE HER will be the future of the Republicans.




To be honest, I've never understood why this country doesn't have a centrist party. That's who both sides go after during the election.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Franko
Member Avatar
Shower Moderator

Quote:
 
To be honest, I've never understood why this country doesn't have a centrist party. That's who both sides go after during the election.



That's been a tradition in Canada. The leftist NDP and the Tories hammer away at the Liberal party, it was even evident during our pre-election debates up here, when the attention should have been mainly on attacking the incumbant Tory PM Harper.

I wonder if there's any chance in the future of either the Replubican party or the Democratic party splitting into two camps; I guess under certain conditions it could happen to either. I'm still trying to figure out where exactly Ross Perot was in this mix. :headscratch:

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
No the Republican Party won't implode over this.

The funny thing is in 2000 and 2004 this was what the pundits were wondering about the Democratic Party. The whole Republican Revolution in 1994 started it off and election after election they kept winning seats in both houses of Congress. The Democratic Party was viewed as being in disarray and having no message. Then, in 2006 (we can discuss why somewhere else, I'm just limiting this to the events), the Democrats found their voice and took back Congress. Now they have Congress and like when Bush was getting elected the first time, increasing their control of both Houses at the same time.

How long will it take for the Republicans to get their act together? Who knows, it took the Democrats 10 years. If they govern smart they may hold on for a few years, but odds are that sooner or later the coveted swing voters will see things shifting too far to the left and start voting Republican again and the pendulum will swing as it is wont to do...
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
Minuet
Nov 6 2008, 03:54 PM
Now - on to the exit poll that Dandandat mentioned. I don't see this as proving anything. All it proves is that Palin was able to get the vote from those who were socially conservative. They voted for McCain because of her - no doubt. My point is that there were not enough of those people to pull off a win. Going after the socially conservative crowd did not help McCain. It hurt him. Had he stayed true to his own path the result might have been different. From what I saw in the commentary here over the last few months there were a lot of people from the more liberal side of the spectrum who cheered the nomination of McCain. Many seriously considered voting for him. Until he chose Palin. That turned a lot of people away from him. And I am willing to bet that choice affected a lot of people who were "undecided" until late in the game.

AB - he may not have stated he made the choice to go after the female votes - but that doesn't negate the possiblity that this was part of the reason. I do agree that he was after the conservative base - absolutely. But that was a miscalculation on his part. A better choice for VP and he could have taken it. The conservative vote was already his due to the view of Obama as far too left wing. He never needed to pander to the conservative constituency and choosing to do so was a mistake.
I don't agree that he had the conservative base of the party locked up because Preseident-elect Obama was viewed as being too far to the left. I think this is where McCain's two vulnerabilities become clearly evident. McCain's "maverick" status is what kept him from beating President Bush for the nomination in 2000. He moved to the right this time in an effort to shore up the base. If he had picked anyone other than a social conservative like Gov. Palin as a running mate, I think he would have had a problem with social conservatives staying home on election day and losing for that reason (probably by a bigger margin too).
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus