Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
here's the problem the GOP.
Like most American Political parties, it is a coalition.
In this case, the combination of LIbertarians, Theocrats, Plutocrats, and Militarists.
The Militarist wing (or Neo-Cons) are declining. There's simply no taste for more war and adventurism right now.
The Libertarians are on the rise.
The Plutocrats took a thrubbing. The nomination of Romney was really the man behind the curtain being exposed, and it wasn't a pretty sight.
The Theocrats are the big question mark. Clearly, they are not going down without a fight. The Establishment has never been happy with them (note their throwing of 2008 rather than risk Huckabee getting the nomination.)
Now, all that said, I think the GOP will probably make a good showing in 2014 and that will give them confidence going into 2016.
The questions are-
1) Which wing becomes dominant in the next cycle.
2) Who do the Democrats nominate?
3) Will the Republican nominee be likable?
4) What the state of the economy will be?
Minor picks up in both as far as the electoral college goes that affects one race the Presidency and while the final outcome looks impressive but when you look at the swing state results that decide elections most of them were close within a 3 to 5 point spread especially the three main one's Ohio, Virginia, and Florida where Obama won by 2. 3, and 1 point those three states could have easily gone Romney if they had yes Obama still wins with 272 electoral votes to Romney's 269 it does put your big electoral win into perspective though. And your gerrymandering talking point is no more relevant in this post than it was the last one.The Republicans need to stop patting themselves on the back for keeping he House. In spite of receiving fewer Congressional votes than the Dems, they managed to gerrymander their way to victory
America does not love you
Always have a excuse for Democrat failures in elections don't you? Here is a bit of reality you will ignore America does not love the Democrats either since their big win in 2008 they lost the House their huge majority in the Senate they made no progress in getting them back in 2012 and there are no indications that will change in 2014 if Democrats and their policies were truly being embraced by the people this would not be the case and you would have to pull out the gerrymandering card to rationalize their failure to do so.
Dems picked up seats in both the House and the Senate in 2012. The biggest victory was in the Electoral College where they trounced the Republicans in he second straight election
Without gerrymandered seats, the Republucans could not hold the House
Very true. Without real campaign reform, nothing much is going to change. Large corporations and special interest groups are going to run the show.I think the overriding desire of voters both Democrat and Republican is finding solutions to our problems, not winning political battles.
theres too much money to be had by the politicians through revolving-door employment at their donor's home base (Wall Street or Wall Street- financed think tanks) than to risk putting the good of the country first
I think the overriding desire of voters both Democrat and Republican is finding solutions to our problems, not winning political battles.
Are Republicans trying to lose the 2016 presidential race?
Blackhawk, every one gets the 'cycle' thing, huh.
What the best Americans are trying to do is to keep the government out of the hands of the liberals and the reactionaries.
Fakey wake up, we currently have a liberal POTUS, in fact he believes you have too much and suggest to the under privileged that you give it up...
He is not a liberal, only a left of center mild neo-con. And your chanting is nothing more than "I don't want to pay taxes."
Jake tends to call people reactionaries that he feels are reactionaries.
Does he take an overly confrontational approach? Sometimes.
Is he always on the money? Maybe not, but from what I see most of the people he calls reactionaries and extremists tend to respond in kind.
Yup, I am dead on the money with Yurt, Ernie S., and others from my start on this Board with far weird reactionary right. They are the enemies of American values.
Jimmy Jam, I will treat others the way they behave. I get along with many lefties, righties, and centrists. I have many on the right tell me to keep bashing the crazies in our party.
We can never ever afford a Santorum or a Perry or a Bachmann or any of the other crazies leading the GOP, for such will destroy the party if not elected first and then destroy our country.
You couldn't be dead on the money if you had a coronary in a bank vault...
If they'd get the economy going, fewer people would need social services. They wouldn't have to cut.
Yup, I am dead on the money with Yurt, Ernie S., and others from my start on this Board with far weird reactionary right. They are the enemies of American values.
Jimmy Jam, I will treat others the way they behave. I get along with many lefties, righties, and centrists. I have many on the right tell me to keep bashing the crazies in our party.
We can never ever afford a Santorum or a Perry or a Bachmann or any of the other crazies leading the GOP, for such will destroy the party if not elected first and then destroy our country.
You couldn't be dead on the money if you had a coronary in a bank vault...
You are either a libertarian or a reactionary, and thus you are irrelevant to the political process.
If they'd get the economy going, fewer people would need social services. They wouldn't have to cut.
Very true.
The question is, who is holding the economy back?
The very same "Market forces" that you PaulBots seem to love.
They have no interest in getting the economy going again. They know that they can abuse the shit out of their employees when you have 7% unemployment. The last thing they want is to go back to what we had under Clinton with 4% unemployment and people could send out a resume in crayon and get a callback.
If they'd get the economy going, fewer people would need social services. They wouldn't have to cut.
Very true.
The question is, who is holding the economy back?
The very same "Market forces" that you PaulBots seem to love.
They have no interest in getting the economy going again. They know that they can abuse the shit out of their employees when you have 7% unemployment. The last thing they want is to go back to what we had under Clinton with 4% unemployment and people could send out a resume in crayon and get a callback.
You couldn't be dead on the money if you had a coronary in a bank vault...
You are either a libertarian or a reactionary, and thus you are irrelevant to the political process.
And yet, every time I ask you for a view I have which is "extreme" you insult me and evade the question. Libertarians are moderates. We want limited government which performs those services only government can do, we want people to own their own bodies and we want the military to be used only for the defense of the United States. Explain what's "extreme" about that to anyone but a socon, neocon or a welfare whore who desperately want government and simply disagree on what they want it to do.
You are either a libertarian or a reactionary, and thus you are irrelevant to the political process.
And yet, every time I ask you for a view I have which is "extreme" you insult me and evade the question. Libertarians are moderates. We want limited government which performs those services only government can do, we want people to own their own bodies and we want the military to be used only for the defense of the United States. Explain what's "extreme" about that to anyone but a socon, neocon or a welfare whore who desperately want government and simply disagree on what they want it to do.
Kaz, be polite and get it in return. Libertarians are not "moderates", because there is no such thing as a mainstream libertarian.
Look up the definition, Kay. If you are indeed a libertarian, then you and those like you are irrelevant to dealing with the issues that beset our country and our culture.
And yet, every time I ask you for a view I have which is "extreme" you insult me and evade the question. Libertarians are moderates. We want limited government which performs those services only government can do, we want people to own their own bodies and we want the military to be used only for the defense of the United States. Explain what's "extreme" about that to anyone but a socon, neocon or a welfare whore who desperately want government and simply disagree on what they want it to do.
Kaz, be polite and get it in return. Libertarians are not "moderates", because there is no such thing as a mainstream libertarian.
Look up the definition, Kay. If you are indeed a libertarian, then you and those like you are irrelevant to dealing with the issues that beset our country and our culture.
I want small government, not no government. I want a military for defense. I want the government out of my bedroom.
Kaz, be polite and get it in return. Libertarians are not "moderates", because there is no such thing as a mainstream libertarian.
Look up the definition, Kay. If you are indeed a libertarian, then you and those like you are irrelevant to dealing with the issues that beset our country and our culture.
I want small government, not no government. I want a military for defense. I want the government out of my bedroom.
That is not libertarianism, simply small government conservatism. Good start.
Inform us of your views on abortion, universal marriage, civil rights, and immigration reform.
Then you, kaz, are a misdefined small government conservative.
You are no more a libertarian than JoeB.
Then you, kaz, are a misdefined small government conservative.
You are no more a libertarian than JoeB.
For example...
