“What Republican can win 270 electoral votes in 2016?”

[Synthaholic]

I doubt any Republican can win 2016. Way too many people dependant on the government now. The Free Handout crowd is pretty much going to outnumber the smart, educated, hard-working crowd from now on.

America has become 'Obamanation'.

If people are dependent on government, it is because the hard-working crowd got cheated by big corporations too many times.

So you guys really don't have anyone to blame but yourselves.

You put the interests of the wealthy above the interests of those who do the actual work, every time, and you wonder why they turned on you?

Really?

Maybe you can start by not nominating people who say stuff like "I like to fire people". That would probably be a big help.

And most of the defenders of the obscenely wealthy are far from it. They'll support cutting programs that help their neighbors, then defend solid gold bathroom fixtures for hedge fund managers.

They are just useful idiots.

 

[candycorn]

Gays are maybe 3% of the population. Not much to worry about. But gays have families, they have friends, they have coworkers who see Republicans as petty and cruel about gays. Young people support gay rights. They look at current GOP policy and rhetoric and ask....Is that the party I want to belong to?

Abortion is similar in that it is a powerful issue among young women. Not just abortion but reproductive rights, reducing or banning insurance for healthcare, closing womens clinics, calling women sluts. Makes young women ask.......Why would I want to belong to the GOP?

How vital an interest can it be when if the issues are narrowed down to just these issues, they lose?

Put the weight of what democrats have done on one side, and gay rights and abortion on the other and you might see something very different than what you think you would. After all, in every state but two, that has put same sex marriage on the ballot, it has lost. It has lost in bright blue California TWICE! It would lose today. More people care that this is the last season of Breaking Bad than feel an interest in gay rights or abortion.

Democrats are on a mission of making life as miserable as possible for ordinary Americans. If they expect that gay rights and abortion are the two issues to hang their hats on and all else will be forgiven, they may be crushingly disappointed.

Belong to the GOP? Who said that? Washing democrats out of the political process doesn't automatically mean "belonging" to the GOP. It just means if you have a nail in your foot, you are more interested in removing the nail than in choosing what kind of shoes you will wear.

Yes Republicans ....cling to that
You can put gay marriage on ballots and find enough people to vote it down. But that tide is turning and recent ballots have accepted gay marriage

But the very fact that Republicans put Constitutional restrictions on marriage up to a vote reveals them for what they are....Out of touch with current American voting trends

Young people will not vote Republican because of their pettyness towards gays, young women will not vote Republican because of their restrictions on womens health and reproductive rights, Hispanics will not vote Republican because of open hostility towards immigrants

Your party is not inclusive, your party is looked at as petty and cruel....you are losing the future voters

The GOP has shown an awesome ability to anger as many different voting blocks as possible all at the same time; have they not.

You made some great points...highlighted above.

 

[JakeStarkey]

None of the 3d party votes together could elect Romney, so your premise is bogus.

The correct answer is that Romney did not pull enough of the moderates to win.

Got it now?

Correct.

There are enough weak (“Reagan”) democrats and independents who will vote for a given republican presidential candidate provided they don’t perceive such a candidate as extreme on the social issues.

That republican candidate needs to:

Respect a woman’s right to privacy and reproductive choice

Acknowledge the equal protection rights of same-sex couples to access marriage law

And acknowledge the due process rights of immigrants and seek immigration reform

By taking the above positions, a GOP presidential candidate will in no way be in conflict with traditional republican and conservative values, as opposition to the above is the recent aberration by the social right.

In other words, they should all jump on your liberal bandwagon and become Democrats. Thanks for the advice.

I am Republican mainstream and you are not: simple enough.

You are going to change or simply vote and we ignore you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

In 2016 it will be a mistake to rely on results from past elections. Wisconsin might not be so blue after the unions are thrown out. Colorado might not be so blue with democrat senators replace by republicans.

At this point in 2013, predictions of the next election in 2016, being like the last election in 2012 is premature. In 2012 there was still hope that democrat policies would be successful. In 2013 the results of those policies are starting to come in and a revolt is brewing across the country. Too many people have lost their jobs. Too many people have become part time employees. Too many people have lost their health care. Too many people are horrified or disappointed in obama's complete mishandling of Syria. Many more are chafing after the scandals that didn't exist in 2012. Too many people are disgusted with being told how wonderful the economy is when they can plainly see it's not.

It's not over yet. We have three more years before democrats can beg forgiveness and try to shift the conversation to gay rights and abortion. How long can democrats ride the gay rights and abortion horse when everything else is falling apart around the nation?

You have it backwards here, Katzndogz, as you do on almost everything.

If the GOP rides "gay rights and abortion" any more it will further alienate a growing national majority. We cannot afford that.

People who are unemployed, out of their homes, live in the shadow of a rising tide of crime don't care about gay rights or abortion. Most people don't care about gay rights. Even when they don't oppose gay rights, it's because they don't care about the subject enough to oppose them. Abortion is turning anyway with more people today considering themselves pro life than any time since Roe was decided. With everything else falling apart, obama intent on punishing the country with WWIII, gay rights and abortion will seem like some very small issues.

You are turned backwards. People have far more hope today than in the final months of Bush's last term. If you demonize abortion and gay civil rights, more people will turn their back on your candidates. WWIII is not around the corner, except in your head.

You need to grip reality, friend.

 

[JakeStarkey]

RW, when he writes, "Young people will not vote Republican because of their pettyness towards gays, young women will not vote Republican because of their restrictions on womens health and reproductive rights, Hispanics will not vote Republican because of open hostility towards immigrants", is 100% right.

The GOP cannot win nationally until it reaches out honestly and sincerely to the needs of women, minorities, and immigrants. Their needs must be met more than those of the Katzndogz.

 

[Synthaholic]

Chris Christie is the only Republican with the slightest chance of reaching 270 EV.

And every wingnut here will be defending him on this board and voting for him.

And every one of them will take the [MENTION=23991]daveman[/MENTION] route:

"Well, he's better than the alternative"

 

[rightwinger]

How vital an interest can it be when if the issues are narrowed down to just these issues, they lose?

Put the weight of what democrats have done on one side, and gay rights and abortion on the other and you might see something very different than what you think you would. After all, in every state but two, that has put same sex marriage on the ballot, it has lost. It has lost in bright blue California TWICE! It would lose today. More people care that this is the last season of Breaking Bad than feel an interest in gay rights or abortion.

Democrats are on a mission of making life as miserable as possible for ordinary Americans. If they expect that gay rights and abortion are the two issues to hang their hats on and all else will be forgiven, they may be crushingly disappointed.

Belong to the GOP? Who said that? Washing democrats out of the political process doesn't automatically mean "belonging" to the GOP. It just means if you have a nail in your foot, you are more interested in removing the nail than in choosing what kind of shoes you will wear.

Yes Republicans ....cling to that
You can put gay marriage on ballots and find enough people to vote it down. But that tide is turning and recent ballots have accepted gay marriage

But the very fact that Republicans put Constitutional restrictions on marriage up to a vote reveals them for what they are....Out of touch with current American voting trends

Young people will not vote Republican because of their pettyness towards gays, young women will not vote Republican because of their restrictions on womens health and reproductive rights, Hispanics will not vote Republican because of open hostility towards immigrants

Your party is not inclusive, your party is looked at as petty and cruel....you are losing the future voters

The GOP has shown an awesome ability to anger as many different voting blocks as possible all at the same time; have they not.

You made some great points...highlighted above.

Jindal winced as he called them the party of stupid. Nutcases from the extreme right spout crazy, offensive thoughts and the mainstream of the party does nothing. Yet if a member of the party supports expanding healthcare, admits to global warming or supports reasonable gun restrictions....he is driven from the party

 

[Katzndogz]

Yes Republicans ....cling to that
You can put gay marriage on ballots and find enough people to vote it down. But that tide is turning and recent ballots have accepted gay marriage

But the very fact that Republicans put Constitutional restrictions on marriage up to a vote reveals them for what they are....Out of touch with current American voting trends

Young people wilol not vote Republican because of their pettyness towards gays, young women will not vote Republican because of their restrictions on womens health and reproductive rights, Hispanics will not vote Republican because of open hostility towards immigrants

Your party is not inclusive, your party is looked at as petty and cruel....you are losing the future voters

Ohhhh so IMPOSING gay mafia demands on an unwilling public is a sure winner! When these minor and very unimportant issues are weighed against a depressed economy, democrat support for international terrorism and a tsunami of crime, where do you think the peripheral issues will end up. They are petty issues, when there isn't anything else to worry about, they might gain an importance they don't deserve. When there are other issues to worry about, guess where they end up?

That's why which republican will be the next president is pretty much an unknown. If you are right, it will be more of a libertarian like Rand Paul.

Rand Paul is one of the reasons the Republicans can't win

If you want to only look at important issues like the depressed economy, international terrorism and a tsunami of crime....What have Republicans done in the last five years?

Whatever they could to stop or slow down the democrat destruction. They are still trying to stop obamacare.

 

[rightwinger]

Ohhhh so IMPOSING gay mafia demands on an unwilling public is a sure winner! When these minor and very unimportant issues are weighed against a depressed economy, democrat support for international terrorism and a tsunami of crime, where do you think the peripheral issues will end up. They are petty issues, when there isn't anything else to worry about, they might gain an importance they don't deserve. When there are other issues to worry about, guess where they end up?

That's why which republican will be the next president is pretty much an unknown. If you are right, it will be more of a libertarian like Rand Paul.

Rand Paul is one of the reasons the Republicans can't win

If you want to only look at important issues like the depressed economy, international terrorism and a tsunami of crime....What have Republicans done in the last five years?

Whatever they could to stop or slow down the democrat destruction. They are still trying to stop obamacare.

Thats the best you have to run on?

No accomplishments in the last five years. Economy struggling, high unemployment, People still without adequate healthcare

And Republicans still brag that they did nothing to help their country?

 

[oldfart]

Yes Republicans ....cling to that. You can put gay marriage on ballots and find enough people to vote it down. But that tide is turning and recent ballots have accepted gay marriage.

But the very fact that Republicans put Constitutional restrictions on marriage up to a vote reveals them for what they are....Out of touch with current American voting trends

Young people wilol not vote Republican because of their pettyness towards gays, young women will not vote Republican because of their restrictions on womens health and reproductive rights, Hispanics will not vote Republican because of open hostility towards immigrants

Your party is not inclusive, your party is looked at as petty and cruel....you are losing the future voters

The frightening thing for Republican strategists is that there is a good body of research indicating that party and ideological identities once formed are persistent. So if you can catch a young voter early, say for two presidential elections, they are likely to vote for that party in most elections for the rest of their voting lives.

This implies that turning off a particular segment of young voters now, say young women, will have lasting effects in that cohort for the next 50+ years. This is true even if the party reverses its position in the future; the damage is already done. You cannot put the toothpaste back in the tube. It also may have a cascade effect, in that the cohort may me dissuaded from supporting the party on other issues in the future because of the "taint" the party has received from the original issue. Hispanics turned off by anti-immigrant rhetoric might not be as likely to embrace a future GOP position that otherwise might be attractive; say support for minority small business.

Veering ever to the right might play to the base today; but if that base is heavily weighted toward older voters and younger voters do not respond well, that base in the future is likely to be much smaller.

 

[kwc57]

It's interesting that as the middle class shrinks because of liberal policies and legislation, the country is being swallowed by debt, the U. S. standing in the world diminishes, more Americans are being made slaves to government entitlements and American morality fades to black...that dimwitted Democrats believe winning elections is all that truly matters.

Or that their failures somehow help them in 2016.

 

[kwc57]

Correct.

There are enough weak (“Reagan”) democrats and independents who will vote for a given republican presidential candidate provided they don’t perceive such a candidate as extreme on the social issues.

That republican candidate needs to:

Respect a woman’s right to privacy and reproductive choice

Acknowledge the equal protection rights of same-sex couples to access marriage law

And acknowledge the due process rights of immigrants and seek immigration reform

By taking the above positions, a GOP presidential candidate will in no way be in conflict with traditional republican and conservative values, as opposition to the above is the recent aberration by the social right.

In other words, they should all jump on your liberal bandwagon and become Democrats. Thanks for the advice.

I am Republican mainstream and you are not: simple enough.

You are going to change or simply vote and we ignore you.

No, you're a Tory Loyalist.

 

[kwc57]

It's interesting that as the middle class shrinks because of liberal policies and legislation, the country is being swallowed by debt, the U. S. standing in the world diminishes, more Americans are being made slaves to government entitlements and American morality fades to black...that dimwitted Democrats believe winning elections is all that truly matters.

If what you said were true...I'd be voting Republican.

......not because of liberl policies and legislation.....

.......we are not being swallowed by debt.....

......our standing in the world is better now than 5 years ago......

.........nobody is being made a slave to entitlements.....

........American morality is just fine......

.....Democrats are no more interested in winning elections than Republicans.....

Nope. Nothing you said was true. Way to go!

They make medications for this type of delusional thinking. Seek help. Now.

 

[candycorn]

What you have to recall about Presidential elections is this; it's not Consumer Reports. People should rate candidates with a scorecard and make the sober decision based on what their values are in my view. If candidate A supports reproductive rights and candidate B supports overturning reproductive rights, I am likely to support candidate A because that is very important to me. If the 2nd Amendment is important to you you'd vote for the candidate who most supports it. Etc...

Voters are not always rational actors.

What happens is that for many who don't delve deep into issues or do not have a strong feeling either way about issues; they vote for who they like; who they more identify with, who looks like them, who shares their faith, philosophy, upbringing, heritage, etc...

Who wins is also a function of who the competition is. Romney won the primary, I feel, because who else was going to get your support? A guy who thinks the earth is 2012 years old (Santorum) despite science or Gingrich who was nuttier than a fruitcake.

This is why the Dems had better be REALLY careful about giving Hillary the ball. She is not that likable. I think the Dems are in for a rude awakening in 2016 if they nominate her. Of course it's a matter of degrees; you put Cruz up against Hillary, I like that battle from Hillary's standpoint. The same with Rand Paul. You put Christie up against her...there is a campaign I'd like to see.

 

[kwc57]

What you have to recall about Presidential elections is this; it's not Consumer Reports. People should rate candidates with a scorecard and make the sober decision based on what their values are in my view. If candidate A supports reproductive rights and candidate B supports overturning reproductive rights, I am likely to support candidate A because that is very important to me. If the 2nd Amendment is important to you you'd vote for the candidate who most supports it. Etc...

Voters are not always rational actors.

What happens is that for many who don't delve deep into issues or do not have a strong feeling either way about issues; they vote for who they like; who they more identify with, who looks like them, who shares their faith, philosophy, upbringing, heritage, etc...

Who wins is also a function of who the competition is. Romney won the primary, I feel, because who else was going to get your support? A guy who thinks the earth is 2012 years old (Santorum) despite science or Gingrich who was nuttier than a fruitcake.

This is why the Dems had better be REALLY careful about giving Hillary the ball. She is not that likable. I think the Dems are in for a rude awakening in 2016 if they nominate her. Of course it's a matter of degrees; you put Cruz up against Hillary, I like that battle from Hillary's standpoint. The same with Rand Paul. You put Christie up against her...there is a campaign I'd like to see.

There is a fair amount of truth in some of what you say. For instances, those who don't delve deep into issues fall for code words like reproductive rights. Virtually no one is against contraception and sees it as a responsible act. If they had any idea that what it really means is murdering an unborn baby out of convenience, they would be appalled.

 

[S.J.]

I am Republican mainstream and you are not: simple enough.

Yeah, right. And I'm a liberal Democrat. Get a new line, nobody buys that bullshit.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Can a Republican Win 270 Electoral Votes in 2016...or Ever? - The Daily Beast



This is an excellent article. There are some hard home-truths that need to be faced and dealt with before Republicans can even think about taking back the White House. I am hoping that since there is a veritable shit-ton of Republicans who want their party back, they will find a way to make it happen. Because this "I'm more conservative!" "No, I'M more conservative!" game is doing nothing to win moderates, and you need the moderates. You cannot win without them.

No republican will ever hold the WH again.

In 2008 a complete fool was elected. A man with no leadership skills or experience. And he did not do a damn thing that truly needed to be done.
In 2012 the dnc amazed me to no end. Their ability to lie, make utterly useless subjects head lines news, and completly bury just how poorly obama had done, set the bar so high, that no moral person or people could ever stoop as low as they did.

No person, of any moral value will ever win the WH

I suspect you are out of step with 99% of the human race, so please, please give us your reasoning.

the 2012 election should have been about UE, debt, spending and the deadish economy.

It was about anything else.

So many blatant lies were told, over the top ones, time was wasted on meaningless crap.

 

[007]

I was literally SHOCKED this weekend when I had a few beers with the most staunch of my democrat friends that's a twice obama voter. He had NOTHING good to say about obama, NOTHING. He said he now believed he was duped. I hated to rub it in but did some, asking why in the world did he think a little junior senator with zero experience at anything other than community organizing and had never had a job in his life, how possibly that person was ready to take over the most powerful nation on earth. He had no answer. I asked if he would vote for another democrat in 2016 and he said, "not unless it was someone that promised to address the out of control spending and UE problem in America," and when I asked who that might be among the dems he said, "I don't know." I asked him if he'd vote for a republican like Rand Paul who leans libertarian which is for less spending, less government, more freedoms and following the constitution and he said, "yes." That's when I about fell out of my chair. THAT, my friends, is how SICK of the LEFTIST BULL SHIT old school, JFK democrats are. I think the 2010 "shellacking" leftards got at the ballet box is going to look like a huge victory compared to the the ASS KICKING they have coming in 2014, and we'll also see a republican president. This country is getting FED UP with LIBERALS and them JAMMING their leftist bull shit agenda down the throats of Americans against their will.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No republican will ever hold the WH again.

In 2008 a complete fool was elected. A man with no leadership skills or experience. And he did not do a damn thing that truly needed to be done.
In 2012 the dnc amazed me to no end. Their ability to lie, make utterly useless subjects head lines news, and completly bury just how poorly obama had done, set the bar so high, that no moral person or people could ever stoop as low as they did.

No person, of any moral value will ever win the WH

I suspect you are out of step with 99% of the human race, so please, please give us your reasoning.

the 2012 election should have been about UE, debt, spending and the deadish economy.

It was about anything else.

So many blatant lies were told, over the top ones, time was wasted on meaningless crap.

I am startled, and, yes, I agree.

 

[daveman]

Chris Christie is the only Republican with the slightest chance of reaching 270 EV.

And every wingnut here will be defending him on this board and voting for him.

And every one of them will take the [MENTION=23991]daveman[/MENTION] route:

"Well, he's better than the alternative"

A potted plant would be better than the alternative.