Reply
Tue 28 Aug, 2007 08:56 am
It appears that young people are turning away from Republican "ideals" in droves. Ironically, history might indict Karl Rove as one of the principle culprits of the demise. His "Gays, Guns and God" platform is not resonating at all with young people and as soon as they decide to actually start voting and as the right-wing dinosaurs die off, the GOP, as we know it today, will no longer exist as a major party. Good riddance!
Young voters turned off by GOP
No great loss!
The only problem is that the world may not be around long enough for us to see that day (at least for this crop of Repubs).
I think this is going to be a major time of transformation for the Republicans. At the moment it's a party within a party. The inside (rotting core) are those I think of as Bushies and the others on the perimeter are the old school Republicans (less taxes, less gov't watchdoging, more isolationist). I think the old school Republicans are going to do some serious house cleaning and rethinking. We've seen this happen before in both parties. Remember the Republicans were once the party of Teddy Roosevelt, a guy who actually wanted to protect the environment and the Democrats where once associated with racists like Strom Thurman. Times change, people change, parties change.
Darth War_dodger is doing a great job of creating more Democrats by making more Americans poor.
its just not cool to be a republican today. times change and when a kid wants to distinguish him/her self from others in the room they will naturally select the opposite opinion.
i watched an entire generation turn to reagan because the alleged counter culture attitude was the dominant one in the late 70's it wasn't cool anymore or individualistic enough to be a long haired liberal if everybody else was.
Oh, yawn. How long ago was Lash talking about the death of the Democratic party?
I believe we will never see the death of a political party in this country. Nor will we ever see the birth of a new one. And sadly, both are badly needed.
Young people eventually grow up and hopefully become a little wiser.
So perhaps the death of the Republican Party is a bit of an exaggeration or premature prediction.
The country would be politically chaotic if there were many parties, that then would require a coalition government after an election. The two parties allows for a manageable government, without the horse trading of a coalition government in a many party system.
So, if the Republican Party didn't exist, what would take its place? Conservatives just don't roll over like a dog. Whatever takes the place of the Republican Party, if it ever ceased to exist, may be something that no one could have predicted (several smaller parties that wind up in a coalition government, forcing the Democrats to horse-trade?) The goal is to have one's platform instituted, not just win elections.
I believe the Republican Party is going nowhere, as long as this country can keep a substantial voting block employed and maintaining a standard of living. With jobs going overseas that could be one big potential dark cloud on the horizon (that is a dark cloud for the Democrats too). What if the U.S. is falling down the proverbial rabbit hole of Alice In Wonderland, when it comes to jobs going overseas?
People vote for the candidate though mostly, not the party. That's how Republicans get elected, I thought.
Who knows; all the old constituencies of the Democrats could wake up one day and think, "It's a great day to become a Republican." Stranger things have happened.
Foofie wrote:
Who knows; all the old constituencies of the Democrats could wake up one day and think, "It's a great day to become a Republican." Stranger things have happened.
Yes, stranger things have happened, like its election day and its time to vote for a Democrat.
okie wrote:Young people eventually grow up and hopefully become a little wiser.
.
Oh, so in other words, even more of them will not be stupid enough to vote Republican?
Foofie wrote: The goal is to have one's platform instituted, not just win elections.
I wish that were true, actually. Seems to me, that the most important thing is to keep being re-elected, so you can keep raking in the cash....
Foofie wrote:The country would be politically chaotic if there were many parties, that then would require a coalition government after an election. The two parties allows for a manageable government, without the horse trading of a coalition government in a many party system.
So, if the Republican Party didn't exist, what would take its place?
y
As I mentioned, I predict the demise of the Republican Party as we know it today. Chances are that the party will change, moving to the left. Then the evangelical lunatics will probably form their own party, which without the infrastructure of an established party, will be destined to be a fringe party, garnering at best numbers similar to the Green Party.
Roxxxanne wrote:
As I mentioned, I predict the demise of the Republican Party as we know it today. Chances are that the party will change, moving to the left.
Then we will have two lovely parties thinking of more ways to build a bigger nanny state. It aint lookin good.
Foofie wrote:The country would be politically chaotic if there were many parties, that then would require a coalition government after an election. The two parties allows for a manageable government, without the horse trading of a coalition government in a many party system.
[...]
People vote for the candidate though mostly, not the party. That's how Republicans get elected, I thought.
It's not true that more parties only and/or necessarily bring coalitions - history shows that such is not generally so.
However, quite often the voters just want to have (great) coalitons.
Voting (candidates) can be done better, I think, if you find them in different parties - so you are sure that she/he represents 'closer' your general political opinion.
--------
From a
recent paper by the Rand Organisation:
Quote:America's two political parties have become more distinct in the past few decades, deepening a divide that has come to be known as polarization. The split has been particularly apparent in the "political elites," by which we mean members of Congress, party activists, and other influential
players in the political process. Ordinary voters are also sorting themselves more tightly into the parties that align with their core values, and ideological concerns are playing a large role in politics. As the parties have moved further apart, there has been a marked decline in
legislative centrists who bridge the parties and broker crucial compromises. Within each party, the members of Congress have become more internally homogeneous in voting and in their underlying beliefs.
---
And something different in a
comment in today's Chicago Tribune:
Quote:In the interest of time and limited space, rather than mention all Republicans who are either closeted gays or clients of escort services, we'd like to ask those who do not belong to either group to please come forward.
Ah, excellent. Thank you both for coming.
What's up with the GOP? Is there something in the water? Are Democratic operatives lacing Republicans' Dasani bottles with heavy sodium, as in Walker Percy's novel "The Thanatos Syndrome"?
[...]
As the 2008 election looms, the political parties seem to have traded places. The Democratic Party is now the churchgoing, family values party, with Mama Clinton as lead lip-purser and aspiring scold-in-chief. She has earned it.
Republicans may as well kick back, enjoy a reprieve from the impossible burden of perfection, and get those bumper stickers to the printer: "They Don't Call Us The Grand Old Party For Nuthin'!"
okie wrote:Foofie wrote:
Who knows; all the old constituencies of the Democrats could wake up one day and think, "It's a great day to become a Republican." Stranger things have happened.
Yes, stranger things have happened, like its election day and its time to vote for a Democrat.
I have a gut feeling a Republican will win. But, don't pay me no mind.
Quote:What's up with the GOP? Is there something in the water? Are Democratic operatives lacing Republicans' Dasani bottles with heavy sodium, as in Walker Percy's novel "The Thanatos Syndrome"?
As evidenced by some of right-wing posters here, many, if not most Republican men are repressed homosexuals.
Foofie wrote:People vote for the candidate though mostly, not the party. That's how Republicans get elected, I thought.
I think you're far wiser than this....the remaining neocons still clinging to Bush's scrotum wouldn't have any idea how to vote for anyone other than a Republican. This, of course, has parallels on both sides of the voting spectrum.
Correct me if my assumption is incorrect....people generally don't form an educated opinion about a certain candidate, they just vote for the best person representing their party. I've heard on many occasions, I was born a Republican and I will die a Republican. This, of course, has parallels on both sides of the voting spectrum.
Roxxxanne wrote:Foofie wrote:The country would be politically chaotic if there were many parties, that then would require a coalition government after an election. The two parties allows for a manageable government, without the horse trading of a coalition government in a many party system.
So, if the Republican Party didn't exist, what would take its place?
y
As I mentioned, I predict the demise of the Republican Party as we know it today. Chances are that the party will change, moving to the left. Then the evangelical lunatics will probably form their own party, which without the infrastructure of an established party, will be destined to be a fringe party, garnering at best numbers similar to the Green Party.
the demise of the republican party has already been accomplished by bush and his cronies and handlers....IMO...
G O P
I think GOP means Genuflect Or Perish
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace