The economy, national security and the perils of big government should speak to all colors and genders, not just white males.

Apparently, Americans are convinced they need to be more worried about racism, abortion rights, keeping illegal immigrant families together and government protecting them from the evils of capitalism and big business.

We have made our bed, now we get to lie in it.

Yes, if the Republicans want to win the presidency, they need a telegenic person of color who can convince Americans he (or she) feels their pain. That is clear, and trumps all other factors.

The decision for the Republicans is do they want their telegenic person of color nominee to be a Democrat-Lite or do they want a real conservative?

Rubio/Cain 2016!

FWIW, I like Bobby Jindahl alot, but he's not telegenic enough for America. Nicky Haley? She's got a VP shot, but they will need to make an effort to make it clear to the American people that she is Indian.

 

Sorry I missed that, your opinion is they ran a faulty campaign.
- Somehow I missed in your 1st post, that it was your opinion it was faulty. Now that I re-read it, it is there in black and white.

The MSM is providing sound bites and talking points that do not tell the whole story. Somehow the GOP is combating not only the Democrat side but the MSM as well.
Look up this thread about the "good reading" on Bain Capital.
That story leads one to an answer that is not true.
- Actually someone just had to right click select the text right from the article and do a Google search to get the remainder of the story.
Not too many do.

How should the GOP talk to people to combat this ?

The GOP does not target a race or gender, and posts like this just drive a wedge further between the population.

If you have the lean you appear to have, it is easy to see that this is what you see.
To suggest this, is to lend the talking point credibility.

 

Any Ticket with Cain on the top or bottom is doomed.
I'm not talking about sexual transgressions.
You simply cannot not know that China has had nuclear capability for the last five decades and expect to be chosen leader of the Free World.

 

You are way overestimating the importance international affairs. It's pretty clear that does not matter to the electorate.

What matters is that the candidate gives good teleprompter.

 

That gaffe was not some little thing.
How do get to his age and not learn that nugget of info...by accident?

There are plenty of people walking the street who don't know stuff or don't care they don't know and I wouldn't vote for them either.

I'm not that smart but I can't possibly vote for someone dumber than me.
This sank Palin and by default McCain.
I want real choices in 2016 so let's end this Cain nonsense.

 

Nicely put, Raoul!

Steve, I agree that the GOP does not "target" anyone, but, they are currently operating in a "fundamentalist" mode. "Illegal immigration MUST be stopped", "Abortions for any reason must be outlawed", "Do away with healthcare for all, people must take care of themselves", "All corporations should be allowed to fail", "Prohibit gay marriage", etc.

Now, I can certainly see some good in ALL these positions, but there is room, in my mind at least, for compromise in all of them. And, I think it is the refusal of the GOP base to look like they might be willing to compromise a bit that excludes the majority of the electorate. I think this is what the smarter members of the party have come to realize.

Steve, you'll notice I've never argued against your fiscal opinions. I suspect you and I share a common viewpoint on this. We (Janet and I) have no debt other than our home (which is worth more than we owe on it) and I don't think it's too much to expect the same from everyone else and from the Government. We planned for retirement, long term healthcare, and so on, and our plans worked out. We didn't spend for more than we could afford.

But, while I am "fiscally conservative", I am also "socially moderate". The people who lost homes, businesses, and loved ones in hurricane Sandy may need the Government's help. Someone who is struck with cancer and needs lifesaving drugs or other medical procedures can't be expected to shoulder the entire burden himself, except in rare circumstances. A child who is born with a chromosome defect may need more assistance than his parents are able to provide. A child who is brought into this Country by his illegal immigrant parents and who knows no country other than this one should have an uncomplicated path to citizenship. And when the GOP does not immediately disown a candidate who ignorantly proclaims, "A woman cannot get pregnant from a 'legitimate' rape.", they are not speaking to the electorate, and certainly not to me.

So, if the GOP can follow their fiscally conservative, smaller government, individual liberties approach while at the same time looking out for the welfare of the citizens of this Country, they will have my vote again, and, I suspect the vote of many others as well.

- Jack

 

It is not easy to separate the social and the economic. You must fund the social. If they "evolve" as you suggest, then there will be in effect only one party. Just call everyone a democrat.

 

I 100% agree it is not easy to separate the social and the fiscal. And you are totally correct that the social must be funded. I don't really think, though, that this means the GOP would evolve into a new Democratic party. After all, the GOP HAS funded social programs in the past. President Regan signed into law the rule that hospital emergency rooms cannot turn anyone away, as one example. Didn't the "No child left behind" program happen during President Bush's tenure?

- Jack

 

Your view of the GOP does not reflect the Republicans I know. Seems to me you are more than willing to buy into a simplistic black/white, all or nothing view regarding the opinions of millions of your fellow Americans.

The debt, deficit and the real unemployment rate are much larger problems than a few social issues.

If the GOP is like you say, they sure are an ineffective bunch. We have millions and millions of illegal immigrants, and the only thing slowing down the flow is our weak economy. There are millions and millions of abortions each year. Millions and millions of people get subsidized health care. We spend billions and billions bailing out companies and making low interest 'loans' to well connected green firms that have no product to sell. Gay marriage will obviously be legal everywhere in our lifetimes.

So Dems have won on all those social issues.

Q: So why keep running against a small, ineffective group of social fundamentalists?

A: So you can tar the fiscally conservative with the same brush, and marginalize any efforts to reduce government control of the economy.

 

The GOP is fiscally conservative and watching out for the welfare of the citizens, to a point.
- Thing is, that point is not far enough for the majority ( or close to the majority ) of the voters.

Private hospital ER rooms cannot turn away someone that is dying, and it is limited to stabilizing them, and getting them transport to another hospital ( i.e. Cook County hospital ).
They can turn away someone with a runny nose or headache, they are not required to be the primary care physician.

The point that was too far was the amount of money it took to upgrade people off Medicaid to the insurance exchanges with vouchers, to upgrade a part of the uninsured to Medicaid was a point too far for the GOP.
Voters in general somewhat agreed with this, as the 2010 elections went a different route than the 2008 election, and for the most part it has stuck.

No Child left behind was a good program that teachers have decimated. Might as well remove that program all together, it is not proving anything anymore.

Sorry I have to ask where you got the sound bite of "Do away with healthcare for all, people must take care of themselves" ?
- The MSM uses this tag line quite often, and that moron Bill Maher, this is one of his favorite drums to beat on.

The alternative marriage options, that is one I agree with the Dem on.
- The GOP takes the Church stance on this, and marriage as far as "legal" or not is a government issue. I do believe that one should not impact the other, let the churches not do any marriage they want to do, that is up to them to run their show the way they want.
Government stance, taxing for marriage I don't think is that far off ( if at all ) from being single so it has little or no impact on tax revenues. Health care, that is company by company if they allow domestic partner today. A lot seem to allow domestic partner. Mine and the "mrs'" insurance both allow domestic partner insurance options same as a 'govt approved' spouse.

The Pro Choice topic. Why are politicians making such a topic out of this ?
This was decided 40 years ago, it is done. Is there not enough other problems to address in the present ? It is a useless topic for campaigns, as it is only meant for emotional impact, and has nothing to do with balancing a budget or which items should be cut back what percentage to do that.

 

I think Jack forgot to add that Republicans want dirty air and water, too.

The legality of abortion may have been decided 40 years ago, but the prospect of losing that 'right' sure stokes up the fears.

"Yeah, those fiscal conservatives may have a point on the economy, but some of them are pro-life."

"Egads! I simply can't take the chance of not having abortion on demand. Better vote for the Dem, just in case"

The reason you keep hearing it is it works.

 

I didn't forget about "dirty air and water", Dirt Bike - I just didn't mention it. But, smaller government = less regulation. Personally, I want the FDA and EPA to be active players. We've seen what "private companies", like the compounding pharmacy in Massachusetts can do if there's no oversight.

One branch of Government I'd like to do away with is that abortion known as the Department of Homeland Security that came into being after 9-11. In my opinion, all it has done is increase the size of government with no real payback and for no real reason. Doesn't the DOD "protect" our homeland?

Steve, I read the GOP mantra of "Overturn Obamacare" as doing away with "Universal Healthcare". I'm not hearing this from the MSM, but from GOP politicians.

And, I DO think some folks with "runny noses" go to emergency rooms and are treated. I had to take my Mother there once, when she fell and broke her tailbone (very painful) and I was astonished at the number of folks there who didn't really seem to be in much of an emergency state. I would not have taken my Mother there, but she was visiting from out of state and this happened in the evening. We couldn't really take her to her own doctor.

- Jack

 

Simple question. Scenario first. You have 500k. You make 5k per month. You necessary expenses run 2500 per month and you donate 10k more per month. How long do you stay solvent. How long are you able to help those charities. That is what the country is doing. The Dems want to cut the 2500 to 1000 and keep the 10k in charitable donations. That is what the government is doing. The rest is BS and doesn't matter. The country is now in a position where we are going to have a very difficult time getting out of debt. The taxes incurred due to Obama's give away programs is causing a scarcity of goods that can and most likely will lead to stagflation. The only cure for stagflation is to remove the stopper in supply. Since that is taxes and give away programs it isn't going any where. We are living in the end times for this country but at least the poor will still be able to use their Obama phones, and sit in the apartments sucking off the working America.

 

Yeah Jack, let's all fear the private sector, and empower big government to protect us.

I'm telling you that big government is much more deserving of your fear than the private sector. Well, if you value freedom and jobs, anyway.

Not that it matters what I think. America agrees with you, and clearly wants more big government, seeing as it is working out so well.

 

That's pretty much the way I see it at this point. It's interesting how the Obama fans still seem to be in campaign mode, using the ObamaforAmerica.com talking points and all.

The dems/liberals/progressives have been throwing the sh*t at the wall for years. This time they got it to stick. Really well. It's pretty amazing what a well oiled propaganda machine can do.