America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 11 years ago by HockeyDad. 131 replies replies.
3 Pages<123
State of the republican party???
bloody spaniard Offline
#101 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
HockeyDad wrote:
Le HockeyDad: Leaving them speechless since 2000!



I'm still digesting Obama steak with sauerkraut & the works!
teedubbya Offline
#102 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
HockeyDad wrote:
Le HockeyDad: Leaving them speechless since 2000!


actually it was only post 51
teedubbya Offline
#103 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
bloody spaniard wrote:
I'm still digesting Obama steak with sauerkraut & the works!


did you get the horsey sauce?
8trackdisco Offline
#104 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 60,110
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Many Voters Still Blame Bush for Bad Economy


Rising prices and chronic unemployment were heavy on the minds of voters Tuesday even as a glimmer of optimism peeked through. Four in 10 said the nation's battered economy is getting better.

Most everyone agreed there's still far to go. They were less likely to blame President Barack Obama for the economic troubles, however, than to point the finger at his predecessor, George W. Bush, according to preliminary results of a national exit poll.

Only a fourth thought they were better off financially than four years ago when Obama was elected. Voters were most likely to say their families were doing about the same. A third felt worse off.

The survey of voters as they left polling places showed 6 in 10 ranked the economy the top issue, far ahead of health care, the federal budget deficit or foreign policy. The majority who don't yet see economic improvement were roughly divided over whether things were getting even worse or just stuck in place.

About 4 in 10 blamed Obama for the nation's economic woes.

Joseph Neat, a stay-at-home father in Hagerstown, Md., said he voted for Republican Mitt Romney because Obama hasn't solved the problems hurting families like his, especially gasoline prices that he called "insane."

"We don't have time for him to make changes. We need the changes now," Neat said of Obama. "And four years is plenty of time."

Three-fourths of voters said the economy is poor or not so good. But many like William Mullins of Lansing, Mich., felt Obama inherited the problems.

"Obama had a lot to deal with when he came to office," Mullins said. "You can't change everything overnight."

They pointed to years of high unemployment and rising prices as the biggest troubles for people like them; those two worries far outstripped concerns about the housing market or taxes in the exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and television networks.

Only a quarter of voters were feeling enthusiastic about Obama's administration; about as many said they're angry about it.

About half said government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals, a point hammered by Romney throughout the campaign. Only 4 in 10 wanted government to do more.

"I haven't had a raise in two years because of Obama's anti-business policies," said Ken Keller, a Schaumburg, Ill., engineer who voted for Romney.

But voters were more likely to say Obama stands for the middle class or the poor. The Obama campaign's insistence that the multimillionaire Romney would do more for well-heeled Americans seems to have taken hold in voters' minds.

Half of voters said they think the former Massachusetts governor's policies generally favor the rich and barely any thought he favors the poor.

"I don't think Romney understands people who are down and out," said Cari Herling, an insurance analyst from Sun Prairie, Wis.

In contrast, only about 1 in 10 said Obama, who has pushed higher taxes for the wealthy, favors rich Americans. About half of voters said taxes should be raised on income over $250,000 per year.

For Obama, the biggest group — 4 in 10 — said his policies help the middle class, with the poor coming in a close second.

Voters tended to think the U.S. economic system as a whole generally favors the wealthy.

Nearly two-thirds of voters said they thought illegal immigrants working in the United States should be offered a chance to apply for legal status, instead of being deported.

In a race that's been neck-and-neck for months, about 1 in 10 voters said they'd only settled on their presidential choice within the last few days or even on Election Day.

The survey of 19,728 voters was conducted for the AP and the television networks by Edison Research. This includes preliminary results from interviews conducted as voters left a random sample of 350 precincts nationally Tuesday, as well as 4,389 who voted early or absentee and were interviewed by landline or cellular telephone from Oct. 29 through Nov. 4. Results for the full sample were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 2 percentage points; it is higher for subgroups.

———

Associated Press writers David Dishneau in Hagerstown, Md., and Todd Richmond in Sun Prairie, Wis., contributed to this report.

———

Online: http://surveys.ap.org/exitpolls






YEAH...whatever he said!horse

teedubbya Offline
#105 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
the truth is once you run accross bad bush it is hard to forget it.
8trackdisco Offline
#106 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 60,110
Well, there is the little issue of the 3-5 trillion wasted on the Iraq War. That would move the deficit from 17 down to 12-14 trillion. You still have problems, but we could use those dollars now.
Homebrew Offline
#107 Posted:
Joined: 02-11-2003
Posts: 11,885
There are several reasons I voted Libertarian this year.
1. I am aregistered Libertarian.
2. Romney changed stances, on issues, more often than a cheap hooker changes Johns. I didn't know where he stood on the issues, from one day to the next.
3. He was talking about lowering tax rates, and eliminating deductions, but would not reveal what deductions would be eliminated. I am sorry, but there are several deductions, that I rely on heavily.
4. He chose Ryan as a running mate. He is a nutjob.

In my opinion, the Republican party lost all credibility, on fiscal issues, during the first shrub term. They never met a spending bill they didn't like, as long as they were spending the money. Defcits be damned.

Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)Herfing Herfing
P.S. Their marrige to the religous right, is destined to run off many more than just me.
Brewha Offline
#108 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,202
It really is Bush’s fault.


Just sayin’
fishinguitarman Offline
#109 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,152
Abrignac wrote:
For the most part, the Republican Party is viewed as the party of the rich, the white male and the religious right. Unfortunately for them, as long as they refuse to alter their platform, the country will continue to elect a Democratic President. On he other hand, the Democrats are viewed as the welfare party.

Not much of a choice for a fiscally conservative independent.







My State, Mississippi, Is one of the poorest states in the nation, yet Republican? Go figure..............
Brewha Offline
#110 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,202
A poor man has poor ways.


Just sayin’
Homebrew Offline
#111 Posted:
Joined: 02-11-2003
Posts: 11,885
fishinguitarman wrote:
My State, Mississippi, Is one of the poorest states in the nation, yet Republican? Go figure..............

That is something I really don't understand, about my state as well. Besides our conservative Democrat Governor, Arkansas is very Republican. If the Republicans reduce the safety net, Welfare, Rental Assistance, WIC, and other federal funding back, it is the red states that will have a large part of their population suffering. Look how many Landlords would have to lower their rents, or their apartment buildings would be vacant. How many grocery stores, would have to make do, without all the $$$ that are spent in food stamps. How many homeless people, with starving children, can the red states handle. fog

Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
P.S. This is not my idea. I heard this argument the other day, and it got me to thinking. What would happen, if the safety net dollars quit flowing. I wonder if the government would actually save money, or would they have to spend more, on Law Enforcement, and Prisons, as desperate people turned to crime, to feed, clothe, and house their families.
ZRX1200 Offline
#112 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,682
“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they’re sure trying to do so, it’s going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can’t and won’t compromise. I know, I’ve tried to deal with them.” ~Barry Goldwater
drywalldog Offline
#113 Posted:
Joined: 06-19-2007
Posts: 5,536
Electoral College, popular vote, and Florida, I like the direction the right is heading.Watch out for that cliff! Oh dam.
JadeRose Offline
#114 Posted:
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
State of the Republican Party? Pretty much fuqed at this point. As long as it panders to the extreme religious right, it will continue to be. It needs to dump those idiots and get back to being the party of small gubmint, fiscal responsibility, (this does not mean for business and the rich only), strong defense, personal freedoms(for all..not just middle aged white men) and building infrastructure. Until then.....they will continue to become more and more irrelevant. They need to tell the Tea Baggers and the religious wing nuts to fuq off and form their own parties.
bloody spaniard Offline
#115 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
JadeRose wrote:
State of the Republican Party? Pretty much fuqed at this point. As long as it panders to the extreme religious right, it will continue to be. It needs to dump those idiots and get back to being the party of small gubmint, fiscal responsibility, (this does not mean for business and the rich only), strong defense, personal freedoms(for all..not just middle aged white men) and building infrastructure. Until then.....they will continue to become more and more irrelevant. They need to tell the Tea Baggers and the religious wing nuts to fuq off and form their own parties.



IMHO, they were mostly the ones who didn't like Romney, threw up their hands, & stayed away from the voting booth in greater numbers than they had for McLame & Winkie in 2008...

I think the Republicans squandered their opportunity to continue Reagan's legacy which wasn't perfect (outsourcing, illegal amnesty, etc.) but united almost everyone. A party which once supported religious liberties, individual responsibility/initiative, lower taxes (AND spending), & did no nation building but maintained strong unwavering alliances (mostly) with folks who had our best interests in mind. Lately, we've been going broke buying influence. Let China butt in other's internal affairs.

Perhaps if the Republicans become more rigidly conservative so that their base turns out instead of walking away from the Bushes, Doles, McCains, & Romneys of the world. To this day I still don't know how Dubya won a second term aside from the imagined threat... I don't think that Buchanan's or Paul's brand of romantic yet pragmatic isolationism/libertarianism will sell well to the majority either. OR if they can pander (more) to soccer moms, latinos, blacks, unions, gays, etc. just like the Democrats. Problem with that is that the Democrats have perfected pandering & one upmanship to a fine science.

So to answer your question, op, I don't know what the Republicans can do. One thing I do know is that I'm walking away from the political process.
I have been involved & sacrificed for it (95% Republican) since 1972 but it has rarely served me well.

Good luck, well-meaning, dancing monkees. The powers are amused & laugh at you.jester

...but hey, if it gives you reason to be or a meaning to life, knock yourself out. Here's a shovel.
JadeRose Offline
#116 Posted:
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
bloody spaniard wrote:
IMHO, they were mostly the ones who didn't like Romney, threw up their hands, & stayed away from the voting booth in greater numbers than they had for McLame & Winkie in 2008...

I think the Republicans squandered their opportunity to continue Reagan's legacy which wasn't perfect (outsourcing, illegal amnesty, etc.) but united almost everyone. A party which once supported religious liberties, individual responsibility/initiative, lower taxes (AND spending), & did no nation building but maintained strong unwavering alliances (mostly) with folks who had our best interests in mind. Lately, we've been going broke buying influence. Let China butt in other's internal affairs.

Perhaps if the Republicans become more rigidly conservative so that their base turns out instead of walking away from the Bushes, Doles, McCains, & Romneys of the world. To this day I still don't know how Dubya won a second term aside from the imagined threat... I don't think that Buchanan's or Paul's brand of romantic yet pragmatic isolationism/libertarianism will sell well to the majority either. OR if they can pander (more) to soccer moms, latinos, blacks, unions, gays, etc. just like the Democrats. Problem with that is that the Democrats have perfected pandering & raised one upmanship to a fine science.

So to answer your question, op, I don't know what the Republicans can do. One thing I do know is that I'm walking away from the political process.
I have been involved & sacrificed for it (95% Republican) since 1972 but it has rarely served me well.

Good luck, well-meaning, dancing monkees. The powers are amused & laugh at you.jester




So, Blood, you honestly think the Repub's will stand more of a chance if they go FURTHER right? Like they further adopt the stance of the "Family Morals" crowd? Promote God and anti-abortion, anti-contraceptive, anti-homosexual, stances even MORE? Seriously? I find that argument laughable and, frankly, typical. I'm sure you're not alone in your thinking. The Repubs already own that crowd and that crowd ALWAYS votes. Whether they like the candidate or not. They voted AGAINST BO. They did vote for Romney..the problem is..they get alot of attention but there aren't as many of them as you (or they) think. The Dems own the minority vote and the soccer Moms. That leaves people like me that don't like either party. I'm the one they gotta convince and with the religious right and the tea baggers and Grover Norquist hanging around stinking the place up...that ain't gonna happen.


I know the final popular vote was pretty close.....has anybody looked to see how many votes the Libertarians got? (My vote...btw). Gee...I wonder what kind of person the average Libertarian is? Could it be they are Non Religious Wingnut, moderate Republicans? Hmmmmmmmmm............
bloody spaniard Offline
#117 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
JadeRose wrote:
So, Blood, you honestly think the Repub's will stand more of a chance if they go FURTHER right? Like they further adopt the stance of the "Family Morals" crowd? Promote God and anti-abortion, anti-contraceptive, anti-homosexual, stances even MORE? Seriously? I find that argument laughable and, frankly, typical. I'm sure you're not alone in your thinking. The Repubs already own that crowd and that crowd ALWAYS votes. Whether they like the candidate or not. They voted AGAINST BO. They did vote for Romney..the problem is..they get alot of attention but there aren't as many of them as you (or they) think. The Dems own the minority vote and the soccer Moms. That leaves people like me that don't like either party. I'm the one they gotta convince and with the religious right and the tea baggers and Grover Norquist hanging around stinking the place up...that ain't gonna happen.



Jade, the Republican party like the Democrat is full of gimmicks & 15 second sound bites which intimidate candidates into saying nothing "controversial". The Republicans stand for nothing except empty platitudes in their platform. They pander to flag, prayer, anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, strong borders, and the American way only xenophobes (opposite of the Democrats). Yet they do absolutely nothing to advance them. There is no bigotry against gays, latinos, or lefthanded gay latinos who dislike contraception. That is against the law. If anything, they observe the law to a fault whether fair or not. There is also no real, substantive PUBLIC love for God and His commandments. That is considered a personal/private choice. Yet secularism (and materialism) is proudly proclaimed & practiced. So I don't think either major party attracts that base of us "rightwing nuts" any longer.

Again, I don't know what the Republicans should do other than disband and allow a strict (and literal) constitutionalist- like party to take its place. One that would still provide a safety net for the elderly, handicapped, and down on their luck through no fault of their own CITIZENS

People like you, brother, who live and let live on the edge of anything goes anarchy (practical nihilists?) should consider supporting... (deleted joke) Abbie Hoffman/Jerry Rubin-like retreads or similar. We can call you the dirty sanchezes alternative to the "tea baggers".
ZRX1200 Offline
#118 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,682
The "Shocker" party
Homebrew Offline
#119 Posted:
Joined: 02-11-2003
Posts: 11,885
JadeRose wrote:



I know the final popular vote was pretty close.....has anybody looked to see how many votes the Libertarians got? (My vote...btw). Gee...I wonder what kind of person the average Libertarian is? Could it be they are Non Religious Wingnut, moderate Republicans? Hmmmmmmmmm............


Pretty Close Jade. I was once a moderate Republican. But the pandering to the moral majority, a contradiction in terms if I ever saw one, and their total lack of fiscal conservatism. I am all for lower taxes, balanced with lowered spending. Part of the problem is that when Bush cut taxes, he expanded government spending at the same time. Also compounding the situation, was the outsourcing of middle class jobs. This totally undermined the benefit of lowering taxes. Yes, the job creators had more money to invest, but the jobs they created, were low paying jobs overseas, and redundant management jobs, to make themselves feel better about shipping the manufacturing jobs, to sweatshops in China and India. It will take the Libertarian protectionism, and higher taxes, to encourage those jobs, to be brought back to the US. Put high tariffs on import of foreign made goods. Have higher tax rates, on capital gains on those companies traded on US stock exchanges, that import goods into the US. Say one, publically traded corp, manufactures goods inside the US, for US consumption, but another corp manufactures goods, for US consumption, in China. Capital gains rates on the first companies stocks, and dividends, would be lowered to 10%, but the other companies capital gains rate would be bumped up to 30%.
All those folks that think that the rich folks would move, to other countries, I say BS. Name one country they could move to, with a lower income tax rate, and strong enough government to protect them from having their assets stolen from them? I am open to suggestions.

The national debt, which at one time could have been paid off, through just spending cuts, has gotten too big to be solved strictly through spending cuts. After we get the debt under control, the Libertarian model of small government, fiscal conservative, and socially moderate personal freedoms would work to keep the debt that way. Unfortunately, the Republican party, never met a spending bill, that they didn't like, as long as they were the party saying how the money was being spent. Deficit or no deficit.

Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
bloody spaniard Offline
#120 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
Skimmed tgrough your post...
The outsourcing of jobs/industries & massive illegal immigration (my other pet peeve) began waaaay before either Bush. They only exacerbated the problem with their milquetoast solutions. The country's woeful fiscal policies have existed for decades. They were just better hidden by our small business- generated economy and by faux number crunching based on static prognostications. As far as I can remember (going back to Nixon- who took us off the gold standard so that we could enjoy "discretionary spending" on our credit card), our government has only slowed down the INCREASE in FUTURE budgetary spending NOT the ACTUAL (current budget) spending- whether taxes were lowered or not.

I won't bore you with my opinions on "domestic investment" abroad. I think that I covered that on one of Jaime's threads... a necessary evil but I don't like the abuses, etc..

Oh, and of course rich people won't move permanently to their summer homes abroad but their money will.
JadeRose Offline
#121 Posted:
Joined: 05-15-2008
Posts: 19,525
bloody spaniard wrote:
They pander to flag, prayer, anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, strong borders, and the American way only xenophobes (opposite of the Democrats). Yet they do absolutely nothing to advance them. There is no bigotry against gays, latinos, or lefthanded gay latinos who dislike contraception. That is against the law. If anything, they observe the law to a fault whether fair or not. There is also no real, substantive PUBLIC love for God and His commandments. That is considered a personal/private choice. Yet secularism (and materialism) is proudly proclaimed & practiced. So I don't think either major party attracts that base of us "rightwing nuts" any longer.


People like you, brother, who live and let live on the edge of anything goes anarchy (practical nihilists?) should consider supporting... (deleted joke) Abbie Hoffman/Jerry Rubin-like retreads or similar. We can call you the dirty sanchezes alternative to the "tea baggers".




First of all.....I didn't call you a Wingnut. There is a strong difference between a true Republican and those who force their beliefs on everyone else. Secondly...you don't know me. You have no idea what I stand for. As far as "no bigotry"...well...let's just say the we will agree to disagree on that.

I think Ronald Reagan was one of the worst President this country has ever had...BUT....until the Repubs get another one like him and dump the zealots...they will NOT win.
bloody spaniard Offline
#122 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
LOL@ "You don't know me"- sounded eerily like the oft used, You're not the boss of me.

Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers, Jade. Guess posting doesn't show facial empathy & smiles. You just sounded very pc about several things. It's culturally popular these days to be intolerant against Christians and be pro- gay. Not attacking you just stating fact. My point is that the Christian "fringe group" that you keep alluding to in the Republican party carry little power & are nothing more than the equivalent to the Democrat's "negro" vote. They get lots of tongue action but little of substance from their Republican betters.

And you skipped my two most important assertions: Republican party like the Democrat is full of gimmicks & 15 second sound bites which intimidate candidates into saying nothing "controversial". The Republicans stand for nothing except empty platitudes in their platform.

8trackdisco Offline
#123 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 60,110
JadeRose wrote:
Could it be they are Non Religious Wingnut, moderate Republicans? Hmmmmmmmmm............



Although I'm more of a spiritual guy over traditional religious, I'd say me, at quite a few others. Romney and Obama were even money to me. I don't believe in Obama or his policies at all. And because to me, my vote is a personal endorsement, there is no way I was voting for a guy that would say anything to anyone to get a vote.

My politics are closer to Romney, but he's nothing more than a pandering vote whore.

At least Obama believed in his *****ed up vision.
rfenst Offline
#124 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,459
Jobs shipped overseas to achieve lower labor and manufacturing costs will not return to the U.S. unless/until the U.S. standard of living drops enough where the wage payable here is equal to or less than the foreign wage. This has nothing to do with the deficit.

dpnewell Offline
#125 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2009
Posts: 7,491
rfenst wrote:
Jobs shipped overseas to achieve lower labor and manufacturing costs will not return to the U.S. unless/until the U.S. standard of living drops enough where the wage payable here is equal to or less than the foreign wage. This has nothing to do with the deficit.



So, what you're saying is most of those jobs should return sometime in the next few years?
ZRX1200 Offline
#126 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,682
Or we don't have a fiat dollar worth nothing that forces people into the cheapest possible alternative.
8trackdisco Offline
#127 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 60,110
rfenst wrote:
Jobs shipped overseas to achieve lower labor and manufacturing costs will not return to the U.S. unless/until the U.S. standard of living drops enough where the wage payable here is equal to or less than the foreign wage. This has nothing to do with the deficit.



Well, the buzz phrase over the last year has been to preserve shareholder value. If we can get rid of all of these pesky jobs here in america over to china, the value will be preserved!
chiefburg Offline
#128 Posted:
Joined: 01-31-2005
Posts: 7,384
wvwa34 wrote:
What the hell direction does it go in now???? Bushes ,failures,Obamas shortcomings, and they cant come up with somebody to win the number 1 office!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Time for a major overhaul????? Damn,gonna be licking their wounds,and major league bitchin for 4 more................ Anxious Tread carefully!!!!

Simple - the balance has shifted and the Republicans will never be the same again. The U.S. demographics have changed and the Democrats will have the upper hand from here on out because the majority like what they offer. They truly want equality across the board and they like the "share the wealth" mentality. They believe the government should be taking care of them and providing for their needs. They believe in government healthcare and they believe the borders are just fine. They don't mind debt because they believe in extending their own credit as much as possible because the government will bail them out with bankruptcy and all will be right. They believe the military is too large and that no one will bother us. After all we have ships that go under water now....... More importantly, they don't feel responsible for anything that goes wrong. They don't believe that schools should hold their kids accountable because their kids never did anything wrong. Plus, the kids know their parents will bail them out of just about anything. They believe in gay marriage and God either doesn't exist, or doesn't belong outside church.

It's a changed world and the world I was born into 50+ years ago is long gone. And, I don't see that world coming back.
bloody spaniard Offline
#129 Posted:
Joined: 03-14-2003
Posts: 43,802
real good seeing you again, Chief!
dpnewell Offline
#130 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2009
Posts: 7,491
Chief,
After the next generation experiences the crushing debt this generation is dumping on them, they may say "enough", and turn this thing around. Here's hoping they have more balls then we do.
HockeyDad Offline
#131 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,208
dpnewell wrote:
Chief,
After the next generation experiences the crushing debt this generation is dumping on them, they may say "enough", and turn this thing around. Here's hoping they have more balls then we do.




We need to give them enough new debt that they do say "enough". Debt on!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123