Some of the answers here are amazing. The people have spoken they voted for Barack Obama, Yes Barack Obama. NOT Mitt Romney.

The GOP needs to drop the religious right, the religious wants nothing more than to force their religious values on everyone which is horrible. The GOP needs to stop being so misogynistic you will lose the majority of women with this pathetic biblical attitude of gender responsibilities.

Stop the idiotic social "dilemmas" which do not exist.

Stop with the fascism of we need ID's at the voting booth, "do you realize how stupid you sound?"

Any smart 17 year old knows how to make a fake ID so stop with the idiocy of demanding ID's at the voting booths it will do NOTHING.

Please GOP learn from your horrid mistakes, focus on what is really important in this country before it falls apart. Cough cough the economy cough cough.

Ross Perot the greatest of all profits " IF NAFTA passes there will a large sucking sound out of the USA"

Please GOP go back to your roots instead of idiocy!

Zombaypirate;1317309 wrote:The GOP needs to drop the religious right, the religious wants nothing more than to force their religious values on everyone which is horrible. The GOP needs to stop being so misogynistic you will lose the majority of women with this pathetic biblical attitude of gender responsibilities.

The GOP held a primary. The candidate preferred by the religious right (Rick Santorum) lost in favor of the moderate candidate preferred by establishment republicans. I voted for neither in the primary.

Now that you have sparked my curiosity. What are these horrible misogynistic decrees that Willard had in store for these unfortunate women? Feel free to be specific.

Zombaypirate;1317309 wrote:Some of the answers here are amazing. The people have spoken they voted for Barack Obama, Yes Barack Obama. NOT Mitt Romney.

The GOP needs to drop the religious right, the religious wants nothing more than to force their religious values on everyone which is horrible. The GOP needs to stop being so misogynistic you will lose the majority of women with this pathetic biblical attitude of gender responsibilities.

Stop the idiotic social "dilemmas" which do not exist.

Stop with the fascism of we need ID's at the voting booth, "do you realize how stupid you sound?"

Any smart 17 year old knows how to make a fake ID so stop with the idiocy of demanding ID's at the voting booths it will do NOTHING.

Please GOP learn from your horrid mistakes, focus on what is really important in this country before it falls apart. Cough cough the economy cough cough.

Ross Perot the greatest of all profits " IF NAFTA passes there will a large sucking sound out of the USA"

Please GOP go back to your roots instead of idiocy!

Oh yeah.......

believer;1317785 wrote:Oh yeah.......

QQ

Zombaypirate;1315434 wrote:What can the GOP do to secure the Presidency in future elections?

If they are unable to stop fraud, then no chance of winning the election exist. Ho hum.

Well it's been a week and I'm not sure the conservative media et al continuing to lambaste women and minorities as being hopelessly dependent on the dole and not wanting to take personal responsibility for their lives is going to do the trick...and that seems to be the conclusion...that everybody just loves Barry Santa Claus, etc.

If this is what you're going with why not at least frame the GOP as the emancipators from evil big daddy government?

Even if we accept that it is true that large swaths of voters have been seduced by Barry Santa Claus...I don't see how insulting them wins them back, no? Perhaps a type of "We understand why you fell for it because life is scary but we're here to free you" type of message as opposed to "look at you not wanting to take responsibility for your own life."

The goal shouldn't be to "win them bcak" unless they subscribe to the principles of the party.

Con_Alma;1320014 wrote:The goal shouldn't be to "win them bcak" unless they subscribe to the principles of the party.

:rolleyes: This is what I'm talking about.

If you're the party of "freedom, individual responsibility and opportunity" allegedly....presupposing that half of America could not get on board with that is a losing game. The approach should be that All Americans by virtue of being Americans in this great country have to believe this at their core and therefore they must be reminded of "who they really are" and attracted away from snake oil salesmen of the DemoRat party, etc.

You shouldn't say..."unless they have those principles we don't want them."

It should be "Of course, all Americans desire those principles deep down...we must remind them"

BoatShoes;1320019 wrote::rolleyes: This is what I'm talking about.

If you're the party of "freedom, individual responsibility and opportunity" allegedly....presupposing that half of America could not get on board with that is a losing game. The approach should be that All Americans by virtue of being Americans in this great country have to believe this at their core and therefore they must be reminded of "who they really are" and attracted away from snake oil salesmen of the DemoRat party, etc.

You shouldn't say..."unless they have those principles we don't want them."

It should be "Of course, all Americans desire those principles deep down...we must remind them"

If that's what you believe then do so in the party of your choice. I view it differently. There's not a good enough reason to attract those who don't espouse ideologies that's not consistent with those held by the Republican party. If that results in a shrinking of the party, so be it.

I don't subscribe to the theory of changing to attract more. I would rather state my core principles and those whom it appeals to can decide if it's right for them.

Zombaypirate;1317309 wrote:Some of the answers here are amazing. The people have spoken they voted for Barack Obama, Yes Barack Obama. NOT Mitt Romney.

The GOP needs to drop the religious right, the religious wants nothing more than to force their religious values on everyone which is horrible. The GOP needs to stop being so misogynistic you will lose the majority of women with this pathetic biblical attitude of gender responsibilities.

Stop the idiotic social "dilemmas" which do not exist.

Stop with the fascism of we need ID's at the voting booth, "do you realize how stupid you sound?"

Any smart 17 year old knows how to make a fake ID so stop with the idiocy of demanding ID's at the voting booths it will do NOTHING.

Please GOP learn from your horrid mistakes, focus on what is really important in this country before it falls apart. Cough cough the economy cough cough.

Ross Perot the greatest of all profits " IF NAFTA passes there will a large sucking sound out of the USA"

Please GOP go back to your roots instead of idiocy!

Hysterical; I love it. :laugh:

Con_Alma;1320026 wrote:If that's what you believe then do so in the party of your choice. I view it differently. There's not a good enough reason to attract those who don't espouse ideologies that's not consistent with those held by the Republican party. If that results in a shrinking of the party, so be it.

I don't subscribe to the theory of changing to attract more. I would rather state my core principles and those whom it appeals to can decide if it's right for them.

I'm saying that you don't have to change your true values to attract more voters...just frame the message differently and that the conservative media/pundits and politicians should not be so insulting towards people/groups who've voted democrat recently...

BoatShoes;1320040 wrote:I'm saying that you don't have to change your true values to attract more voters...just frame the message differently and that the conservative media/pundits and politicians should not be so insulting towards people/groups who've voted democrat recently...

The should should insult whom they want and praise those they want. I worry little about sugarcoating or polishing messages. If it's provided in any way and it appeals to people great. If not, then those people have others options. They should go seek them out.

Con_Alma;1320046 wrote:The should should insult whom they want and praise those they want. I worry little about sugarcoating or polishing messages. If it's provided in any way and it appeals to people great. If not, then those people have others options. They should go seek them out.

I think you're being a little silly here aren't you (but you always debate this way so why should I be surprised?). Just saying that declaring that half of America wants free stuff isn't doing any favors unless of course you indeed want society to repudiate the fiscal and social conservatism you espouse...

BoatShoes;1320058 wrote:I think you're being a little silly here aren't you (but you always debate this way so why should I be surprised?). Just saying that declaring that half of America wants free stuff isn't doing any favors unless of course you indeed want society to repudiate the fiscal and social conservatism you espouse...

????

I'm not debating. The party isn't seeking "favors". They aren't trying to attract people who don't want to be there. I wouldn't and I agree with them.

If the people are more put off by the party talking about those who get "free stuff" than they are attracted to the social conservatism message then they are not a fit for the party.

I agree with you boatshoes , in that the "R''s lost because they poorly packaged their message....and of the inflexibility in attitudes of some conservatives. But I think it is time to the "47%" crap to bed and recognise it for what it was...a talking point that Democrats used to hammer Romney over the head with and win the election. Romney never 'declared' it....it was a surrepticiously obtained video of a talk with donors and members of 'the choir'. It wasn't that he didn't care about 47% of the population...it was that he didn't care about the 47% of the voters that were going to vote democratic no matter what he did, and he wasn't going to waste time trying or changing his message to please them.

Why do we have to 'package our message nicely'. That is what the left wants us to do, all the while they are spending billions on viscious negative adverstising against us ........because negative adverstising works.

We just told America how we can resurrect it, how we can create an environment that will foster job growth, how we can harness our own energy resources, how we can become energy independant, how we can start to balance our budget, how we can do many, many positive things. A very nice package of messages indeed. All the while The Left said Mitt Romney makes too much money, ships jobs overseas, doesn't pay his fair share, and wants to take away women's contraception ----- all a load of horsesh!7, but it worked. And yet, wer'e supposed to play nice to win votes ----- hysterical.

HitsRus;1320085 wrote:I agree with you boatshoes , in that the "R''s lost because they poorly packaged their message....and of the inflexibility in attitudes of some conservatives. But I think it is time to the "47%" crap to bed and recognise it for what it was...a talking point that Democrats used to hammer Romney over the head with and win the election. Romney never 'declared' it....it was a surrepticiously obtained video of a talk with donors and members of 'the choir'. It wasn't that he didn't care about 47% of the population...it was that he didn't care about the 47% of the voters that were going to vote democratic no matter what he did, and he wasn't going to waste time trying or changing his message to please them.

I hear what you're saying but I'm not talking about Romney any more...it's the whole Conservative movement. O'Reilly is saying people want stuff...the American Enterprise Institute is putting out a book called "A Nation of Taker's"...Limbaugh is telling people that Hispanics aren't voting for Democrats because of Immigration but because they want free stuff! Etc.

Even if we take a step back and accept that underlying narrative...the overtone is generally condescending towards these groups that are leaning democrat.

If I'm a Republican the message is "No, single woman, you don't need WIC and food stamps...the democratic party is against you...come with us and we'll empower you to be free." Etc.

Needs to be more of an effort to paint the democratic worldview as bad rather than the people who have currently been persuaded by that worldview...if you understand what I'm saying.

QuakerOats;1320119 wrote:Why do we have to 'package our message nicely'. That is what the left wants us to do, all the while they are spending billions on viscious negative adverstising against us ........because negative adverstising works.

We just told America how we can resurrect it, how we can create an environment that will foster job growth, how we can harness our own energy resources, how we can become energy independant, how we can start to balance our budget, how we can do many, many positive things. A very nice package of messages indeed. All the while The Left said Mitt Romney makes too much money, ships jobs overseas, doesn't pay his fair share, and wants to take away women's contraception ----- all a load of horsesh!7, but it worked. And yet, wer'e supposed to play nice to win votes ----- hysterical.

It's not "playing nice" it's eliminating the obviously transparent disdain for half of America that is, for example, exhibited by several posters who were Romney advocates on this forum.

Saying "We're the party of personal responsbility and obviously none of you folks desire personal responsibility and discipline" isn't going to work.

BoatShoes;1320128 wrote: Saying "We're the party of personal responsbility and obviously none of you folks desire personal responsibility and discipline" isn't going to work.

Yet the Democratic theme was very much "No you can't" and "The deck is stacked"...so you need gubmit. THAT is the message I have disdain for. Lowering the bar and lowering expectations is offensive. It's disparaging and depressing. But I don't see the Obama supporters on this board taking issue with it.

Whatever form of trickle down theory (be it economics or govt) you subscribe to, nothing has shown to really change anyone's share of the pie. But we do know when you make the pie smaller or simply retard it's growth, that the economic loss will be felt disproportionately by the poor and middle class. And that's the great illusion of socialism - redistribution, by definition, does not create value and actually destroys value (i.e. deadweight loss). If you don't grow the economy, you don't create jobs. And if you're not creating jobs, you aren't creating opportunity for supply & demand to drive wages, which is how you "redistribute" REAL wealth in a productive way.

While I agree with you that the characterization is not an effective means to changing the culture, the description is accurate. I think many on this board would say the great disappointment, or source of "disdain", is that the electorate is simply too ignorant to elect people that offer real solutions. Many of the solutions that can and should be on the table would make such a person unelectable.

gut;1320137 wrote:While I agree with you that the characterization is not an effective means to changing the culture, the description is accurate. I think many on this board would say the great disappointment, or source of "disdain", is that the electorate is simply too ignorant to elect people that offer real solutions. Many of the solutions that can and should be on the table would make such a person unelectable.

I thought this type of elitist condescension was the realm of liberals, eh?

Not going to win elections when this stuff is just exuding from Conservatives everywhere (and it is) isn't going to win any elections anytime soon. Obviously I wouldn't have a problem with that. :thumbup:

BoatShoes;1320123 wrote:...

If I'm a Republican the message is "No, single woman, you don't need WIC and food stamps...the democratic party is against you...come with us and we'll empower you to be free." Etc.

...

...but you're not a Republican. Are you? Those who are Republican are not choosing that route as you have described.

If someone is "leaning Democrat" they are not going to find what they want in the Republican party.

Sonofanump;1319762 wrote:If they are unable to stop fraud, then no chance of winning the election exist. Ho hum.

they can always get the "HOW TO RIG A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION HANDBOOK" by Richard M. Nixon.

KnightRyder;1320185 wrote:they can always get the "HOW TO RIG A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION HANDBOOK" by Richard M. Nixon.

The only rigged presidential election Nixon had experience with was the one he lost.

BoatShoes;1320155 wrote:I thought this type of elitist condescension was the realm of liberals, eh?

Not going to win elections when this stuff is just exuding from Conservatives everywhere (and it is) isn't going to win any elections anytime soon. Obviously I wouldn't have a problem with that. :thumbup:

I know; isn't it amazing how the repubs control 60% of statehouses, not to mention the governorships of 6 of the 10 largest hispanic populated states. How can they do that, and still be so mean.

Con_Alma;1320159 wrote:...but you're not a Republican. Are you? Those who are Republican are not choosing that route as you have described.

If someone is "leaning Democrat" they are not going to find what they want in the Republican party.

Most plaintiff lawyers are liberal democrats, rich ones too - generally confiscating a third of the amounts due the 'little people', with a straight face no less, then going out to a wine and cheese party. Heroic bunch they are.