How to Save the Republican Party

The Republican Party is in trouble: In the wake of the presidential election, everybody has said so, and everybody is right. From there, however, a hundred paths diverge and a thousand voices have been heard. The relevant questions are these: How deep is the trouble? How much of it is self-inflicted and how much is a function of circumstance? Can the problem be repaired, and if so, by what means?

…………….

By all rights, Barack Obama should have lost the 2012 election. The economy during his first term in office was weak from beginning to end. Growth was anemic when not utterly static, unemployment was persistently high, and, as recently as last year, an overwhelming majority of Americans still believed we were in a recession. The signature legislative achievements of the president’s first term—the Affordable Care Act and the stimulus package—were so unpopular that on last year’s campaign trail he rarely mentioned them.

Meanwhile, the Republican Party, which in 2010 had gained an epic midterm electoral victory, was regarded as highly energized and poised to win. Michael Barone, one of the most knowledgeable political observers in America, predicted Mitt Romney would comfortably defeat the president. “Fundamentals usually prevail in American elections,” Barone wrote four days before the election. “That’s bad news for Barack Obama.”

And yet Obama won going away, defeating Romney by 126 electoral votes (332 to Romney’s 206) and winning the popular vote by nearly 5 million. In the Senate, which many had thought likely to fall to Republican control, the GOP lost two seats; in the House, it managed to hold its majority, but at the loss of eight seats.

The 2012 election was not only a dismal showing for the Republicans but the continuation of a dismal, 20-year trend. Out of the last six presidential elections, four have gone to the Democratic nominee, at an average yield of 327 electoral votes to 210 for the Republican. During the preceding two decades, from 1968 to 1988, Republicans won five out of six elections, averaging 417 electoral votes to the Democrats’ 113. In three of those contests, the Democrats failed to muster even 50 electoral votes.

What is the reason for this swift and stunning reversal of electoral fortunes? The answer lies in a variety of factors—and in their confluence.

…………….

The first factor is America’s changing demographics. Much has been written on this topic, but the essential datum is the long-term shrinking of those demographic groups, especially white voters, who traditionally and reliably favor the GOP: from 89 percent of the electorate in 1976 to 72 percent in 2012. This decline is partially an artifact of a change in the way the Census Bureau classifies Hispanics, who used to be counted among whites before being placed in a separate category. But it has much more to do with a real, ongoing change in the composition of the American populace. In any given contest, the GOP can overcome this obstacle. Over time, however, the obstacle will grow ever larger.

Consider the performance of Mitt Romney, who carried the white vote by 20 points. If the country’s demographic composition were still the same last year as it was in 2000, he would now be president. If it were still the same as it was in 1992, he would have won in a rout. If he had merely secured 42 percent of the Hispanic vote—rather than his pathetic 27 percent—Romney would have won the popular vote and carried Florida, Colorado, and New Mexico. Republicans, in short, have a winning message for an electorate that no longer exists.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/articl...publican-party/

Total bull, the republicans lost because they had a milk toast moderate running, and they never won 2010, the tea party did. The establishment thinks that to win they need to be more like the democraps. Damn, how stupid. Democrap lite and the conservatives stay home, mccain llost because he was a loon, I did not vote for him, and only voted for mit hoping to beat obama, his vp was a very bad choice. A republican can not win with two northerns on the ticket. Mit should have picked the governor of Virginia as his vp.

Quote: nerd wrote in post #2

---

Total bull, the republicans lost because they had a milk toast moderate running, and they never won 2010, the tea party did. The establishment thinks that to win they need to be more like the democraps. Damn, how stupid. Democrap lite and the conservatives stay home, mccain llost because he was a loon, I did not vote for him, and only voted for mit hoping to beat obama, his vp was a very bad choice. A republican can not win with two northerns on the ticket. Mit should have picked the governor of Virginia as his vp.

---

I just think it's sad you're buying the media hype about "demographics" and such.

Gee in 1992 Romney would have won? Didn't Clinton win that year? Against an arguably even more liberal Republican.

This article makes no sense and neither does the media narrative.

If Demographics pre-2000 were in the GOP favor, why did we lose the previous two elections?

Quote: nerd wrote in post #2

---

Total bull, the republicans lost because they had a milk toast moderate running, and they never won 2010, the tea party did. The establishment thinks that to win they need to be more like the democraps. Damn, how stupid. Democrap lite and the conservatives stay home, mccain llost because he was a loon, I did not vote for him, and only voted for mit hoping to beat obama, his vp was a very bad choice. A republican can not win with two northerns on the ticket. Mit should have picked the governor of Virginia as his vp.

---

Zitat

---

The issue of climate disruption is far more complex, but can play a similar, discrediting role. There is a difference between a healthy skepticism toward fashionable liberal shibboleths and dogmatic resistance to accumulated evidence. Gregg Easterbrook, an environmental commentator who has a long record of opposing alarmism, put it this way: “All of the world’s major science academies have said they are convinced climate change is happening and that human action plays a role.”

---

Right, so if the GOP had just embraced AGW and climate change in 2012, they would have won?

These two clowns are complete idiots.

Quote: Weird Tolkienish Figure wrote in post #7

---

These two clowns are complete idiots.

---

Quote: W-Girl wrote in post #4

---

Quote: nerd wrote in post #2

---

Total bull, the republicans lost because they had a milk toast moderate running, and they never won 2010, the tea party did. The establishment thinks that to win they need to be more like the democraps. Damn, how stupid. Democrap lite and the conservatives stay home, mccain llost because he was a loon, I did not vote for him, and only voted for mit hoping to beat obama, his vp was a very bad choice. A republican can not win with two northerns on the ticket. Mit should have picked the governor of Virginia as his vp.

---

Nerd,

I think it is a serious article and brings up some good points. I didn't reproduce the whole thing here but if you are interest ....read it and give it a chance !!

I think you would be surprised it doesn't talk about Romney hardly at all !!

---

The GOP does have a persistent problem, it's a tremendous dearth of leadership, running "stiff old white guys" repeatedly, and listening to clowns like these guys.

But mostly the GOP has a huge leadership problem.

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #6

---

Spssst. Just take a look at who wrote this piece. Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner.

---

Quote: W-Girl wrote in post #11

---

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #6

---

Spssst. Just take a look at who wrote this piece. Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner.

---

You got to be open minded, GUYS !!!!!!!

We don't get anywhere ....if we listen to each other talk about how great the R party is ..was ...use to be !!

WHO ELSE to listen to ...except the opposition because sometimes they see stuff we can't see !!

---

Quote: Weird Tolkienish Figure wrote in post #10

---

The GOP does have a persistent problem, it's a tremendous dearth of leadership, running "stiff old white guys" repeatedly, and listening to clowns like these guys.

But mostly the GOP has a huge leadership problem.

---

Quote: Weird Tolkienish Figure wrote in post #12

---

Eh? Heisenberg just said they should all be burned alive?

So where's the talk about how great the "R party" used to be? Oh wait, there is none.

Think for yourself, don't swallow the media narrative. Do you really, truly, honestly think they want a conservative, GOP future?

---

Quote: W-Girl wrote in post #13

---

Quote: Weird Tolkienish Figure wrote in post #10

---

The GOP does have a persistent problem, it's a tremendous dearth of leadership, running "stiff old white guys" repeatedly, and listening to clowns like these guys.

But mostly the GOP has a huge leadership problem.

---

EXCUSE ME ????

The Donkey Party ........has leadership ??

Is it leadership or is it friends like the MEDIA THAT GETS THE JOB DONE ....for them ??

---