Rebooting the GOP

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by sysiphus, Jan 17, 2012.

  1. sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #1
    Disclaimer/background: I'm a registered Republican, who has usually (but not always) voted the GOP ticket in the past. While I disagree with him on several things, Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate I believe might actually do what he says, rather than pander to whatever's popular. In short, I'm not a big fan of his, but he's the only GOP contender (remaining, but I would have supported Huntsman) I'll vote for.

    All that being said, it seems that Paul has a significant following/base that will *not* support the mainline GOP ticket (Romney etc). Frankly, I really hope that if Paul doesn't get the nomination (and I don't really think he will), that Paul supporters will either write him in or vote for another somewhat similar third party (à la Gary Johnson). My opinion is that this would crush the GOP's chances for this term, and maybe, just maybe, push for something of a reboot of the GOP's image/principles. Let's face it, they may be "Conservatives", but they're not fiscally conservative, and they're socially in the stone age. I don't see how the party can last as-is, and my thought/hope is that Paul might be a catalyst for change in that regard. Thoughts?


    Also, in case there was any doubt before, I'm officially on the "Fox News" is bollocks bandwagon..if you can spare a couple minutes, check out this video and laugh as the Fox anchor does his best to vomit out how well, just maybe polls are showing people don't like the annointed candidates quite as much as Paul :rolleyes: Youtube Link Here

    (One more time to make it clear: I don't like Paul on all fronts. I think he's dead wrong on several social issues...but he's the only GOP candidate remotely close to being fiscally prudent/reasonable re: military spending/action.)
     
  2. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #3
    No, they are not at all like Conservatives. The common term we use for the noisy faction of the GOP is "neo-conservative". The "neo-" prefix has largely come to mean "using the name but not reflecting what it means". Richard M. Nixon was a real conservative, and he would be so far to the left of these republicans, it is not even funny.
     
  3. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #4
    Ron Paul could end up being the straw that breaks the camel's back, but as of now he's said he won't consider a third party run. If he were to run, it would most definitely cause a GOP crisis at the polls. If Ron Paul's supporters represent a durable 20% of the GOP electorate at large (his percentages in Iowa and New Hampshire have been near 25%, and his South Carolina figures are not too far off), then there are only 5 states that McCain won in 2008 that would be able to absorb that kind of vote fracture and still go to the Republican candidate.

    More broadly, the current GOP ideology is going to be problematic for the party in more ways than one after 2016. The party is dominated by old white (straight) men who come from privileged backgrounds. While that alone isn't enough to turn off voters, the message of the GOP for years has been anti-women, anti-immigrant, anti-tolerance, and anti-gay. As a result, almost every minority has become aligned with the Democrats. This wouldn't be a problem, if not for the fact that the American ship is sailing directly towards the waters of plurality.

    To compound problems, the GOP is going to be facing a demographic shift that is unhelpful to their current electoral strategy. Voters who were between 18-25 in 2008 are overwhelming to the left of mainstream America, and they have not yet begun to vote in overwhelming numbers. By 2016, however, they will be between 25-33, the age cohort which tends to vote in significantly higher numbers. This cohort also belongs to the broader Echo Boom generation, which is almost as large as the Baby Boom generation (because they are their children). If this generation can't come to identify with the GOP (the GOP crusade against the bedroom comes to mind), then it will not be competitive until it finds a way to appeal to hispanics and other substantial voting blocks.
     
  4. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #5
    Interesting analysis. The GOP is so intent on capturing the whitehouse in 2012 because it could well be their last chance? Occupy would seem to support this idea, unless their real disenfranchisement could be sustained. It almost seems like tea was the last flare-up of a guttering candle.
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    OP- Ron Paul is the worst of the bunch, IMO. He's fine with states taking rights from people, just not the Fed. He's been feeding us a line of BS so disingenuous, it begs belief. If you think Ron Paul is any better than the rest, you're fooling yourself. Look at him more closely. Look at what he really says, who backs him, and you should be quite horrified.
     
  6. sysiphus thread starter macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #7
    Lee, I agree that there is lots not to like. That said, he's the only one of the lot with the guts to speak up against SOPA and PATRIOT. He's also the only one who has a clue about reducing ~all~ spending including military spending. He's not itching to go to war yet again, either. All of the other GOP candidates fail miserably on some combination of the above. So in those respects, yes, he is better. There isn't a single GOP candidate that has acceptable positions on gay rights, sadly. Again, I'm hardly defending the man on all counts. All I'm saying is that he's the least worst of the lot in my book, and I think he has a real chance to shake up the GOP establishment, if he plays his cards right.
     
  7. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #8
    I disagree completely. He will have my vote.

    As an aside, the term "rights" gets thrown about way too loosely on these forums IMO.

    What you are referring to is that if the constitution does not specifically designate a power to the Feds, then it is the power of the state. This is more of an ideology that is different than the status quo and I for one agree with it.
     
  8. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
  9. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #10
    Sorry, could you clarify this? Has Paul described the manner in which he would cut military spending? Because, if he says he has a clue, that strongly suggests he has no idea what he is talking about, or that he is lying. If he really believes he can slash the pentagonal budget indiscriminately without enacting measures to mitigate the severe damage that those cuts would do to the economy of specific regions and the nation overall, then this man would be far more reckless and dangerous than some of us have already put forth.
     
  10. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #11
    What I find hard to believe is that the Republicans once had leaders like.

    A.Lincoln
    D.Eisenhower

    Now look at them.:confused:
     
  11. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #12
    While I agree the Republican party needs a reboot, I don't think it's going to have any kind of "hard reset". Parties, if they exist long enough, seem to have this tendency to slide towards the right. I think it's possible that, some time after the mid-century mark, we'll see the Republican party essentially dwindle into obscurity, the Democratic party will come to represent what genuine Republicans stood for, and a new left-wing party will emerge.
     
  12. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #13
    I'll one up you. The American people need a hard reset. If they did not seek out nonsense, the ability of the GOP (and the Democratic Party as well) to deliver nonsense would not garner the attention it does. It would be one thing if we lived in a true dictatorship where we had little access to knowledge and information, but we should know better than this.
     
  13. MyDesktopBroke macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    #14
    I think Rick "I would send troops immediately back into Iraq" Perry goes beyond Paul for "wtf did I just hear"isms.

    I think the most glaringly obvious flaws in the current GoP are illustrated by the Huntsman campaign fiasco – they disregard actual foreign policy experience for saber-rattling armchair patriotism, run out anyone who is "crazy" enough to seriously engage in scientific discourse or debate, and label anybody close to center-right as a dangerous liberal/socialist/"moderate," etc.
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #15
    Duke- I've listed a million reasons why Ron Paul is not just a bad candidate, but quite dangerous. I can list them again if you want, and if you still think he's a great guy- well, I won't know what to say.
     
  15. SwiftLives macrumors 65816

    SwiftLives

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2001
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    #16
    If Ron Paul runs as a third-party, there's a very good chance that would tip some swing states into Obama's column by splitting the GOP vote.

    However, he has been doing surprisingly well in the polls and primaries (usually second or third).

    I think it's going to come down to his ego vs. the Republican establishment.
     
  16. decafjava macrumors 68020

    decafjava

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Location:
    Geneva
    #17
    Well Lee, if you have a post where you listed them do that-from the outside as an ex-pat Canadian the only things I really know about him in detail is his advocacy of state's rights and stand - alone among Republicans and most Democrats - against the current insanity of American military interventions everywhere. So that latter position I applaud.

    I am guessing by your posting history that Ron Paul's stand on state's rights means he would not condemn state's passing of discriminatory (against minorities - gay, ethnic etc.) laws if within their "constitutional" perogative. Then I can understand the unease*, but does that mean he himself supports such legislation?



    *Reminds me of the cry of so many governments (including Western governments) hiding human rights abuses behind the shield of state sovereignty. Even the neo-Confederates defending slavery with state's rights arguments, even though slave-owning states pushed the Federal government to force non-slaveowning states to return fugitive slaves (Dred Scott decision if my memory is not rusty).
     
  17. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    Let's see- just for starters:

    1. You are correct when you say that he would be fine with letting states pass discriminatory laws against whomever they like. Whether or not he supports any such legislation is irrelevant. These kinds of laws are only bad if the Fed passes them apparently.

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ron-paul-personally-opposed-to-same-sex-marriage-but/

    2. He would like to repeal key provisions in the Civil Rights act:

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-wa...-on-civil-rights-act-private-property-rights/

    That's just for starters. I'll find you more later.
     
  18. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #19
    Ron Paul? Puhleeze.


    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/10-shocking-quotes-from-ron-pauls-newsletters.php
     
  19. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    And this is positively charming.

    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/12/how-ron-paul-talks-about-race.html

    BTW- yes, I know it's Andrew Sullivan's opinion piece, but all claims are sourced on the page.
     
  20. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #21
    I don't think most in the GOP realize this demographic problem, yet. The tea movement and the current primary races are, in my opinion, a manifestation of the the GOP's most extreme position: that everything the Democrats do is wrong.

    This isn't a sustainable platform, especially in the face of a president who is so conciliatory.

    I don't think this will happen. The two parties have been solidified for a very long time. Absent a dramatic change to electoral laws, it is much more likely that the parties will simply realign in their central platforms if a string of consistent losses occurs.
     
  21. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #22
    Ron Paul ties to side-step the social issues by claiming they are for the states to decide. In other words, he has no problem with discriminatory laws as long as they are state laws rather than federal laws.

    I don't see how this position helps anyone.
     
  22. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #23
    It doesn't. It's damn scary.
     
  23. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #24
    Rebooting the GOP

    For what it's worth this is the 3rd survey I've done in the last few months. I wonder how many people taking these surveys answer "no" for #13. And yes, I filled in the numbers because I wanted to.
     

    Attached Files:

  24. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #25
    What is that survey exactly?
     

Share This Page