Politics

Politics

  • Obama

    Votes: 4 1.1%

  • Romney

    Votes: 172 48.9%

  • Other

    Votes: 46 13.1%

  • a:3:{i:1637;a:5:{s:12:"polloptionid";i:1637;s:6:"nodeid";s:7:"2882145";s:5:"title";s:5:"Obama";s:5:"

    Votes: 130 36.9%
  • Total voters
    352
Jebediah Springfield

Jebediah Springfield

...
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
237
connor_in said:
I know he is a conservative writer, but I thought I would bring his idea here for discussion purposes. What do you think?

Charles Krauthammer: The way forward - The Washington Post

He feels the republicans do not need a major structural change, just push one idea on Latinos...forcefully...



Read the full article. Not sure I agree with him that it would work, but it is one of many items being discussed.
Click to expand...


Rather have someone who knows what they are talking about give their opinion

Edit: I should say on the Latino part not the rest
 
Last edited:
IrishJayhawk

IrishJayhawk

Rock Chalk
Messages
7,181
Reaction score
464
Redbar said:
I have to fundamentally disagree with this line of analysis. Demographics should not inherently be a republican problem. Latino's are not born democrats, neither are blacks, nor women. If the Republican Party's message does not have aspects that speak to these demographics then that is a party problem, not a demographic problem. The logical end to what you are asserting is that the Republican Party is for "white's only", preferably men. If that is the case then they are by definition a racist institution and probably not worthy of the platform they have held in this nation of immigrants.
Click to expand...

I generally agree with you. It's not that Latinos are default democrats. I just think that republican policies that are important to a large portion of the demographic are not very palatable. They'll have to make policy changes in order to get more votes.
 
IrishinSyria

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
1,920
IrishLax said:
Had a really interesting conversation today with the one English speaking foreman on one of my jobs while waiting for a late concrete truck...

He said literally everyone he knows in his community voted for Obama. Why? Not because of social issues like gay marriage, abortion, etc. or anything like... or because they identified with him at all because he's a minority... but because, in his words, working class people in his shoes really care about things like social safety nets/universal healthcare and you have to vote in your best interest. They work relatively high injury risk jobs AND have high turnover in their industry. Contractor work forces surge and contract job to job... year to year... and especially hard when their is economic uncertainty.

Succinctly, in his shoes you'd have to be completely not self-interested and/or crazy to support the Republican platform. Also, these people are some of the hardest working I've ever met... certainly not the rhetorical "welfare leech" most conservatives like to paint that group of people as.

I think the Republican party doesn't need a huge retooling... they just need to back off of some of the more hardline stances and choose a working class group to champion/cater to. Right now everyone in their group thinks that if a Republican gets in office they're going to take away all of their social protections to "cut costs" and push for a "fend for yourself" system where they'd be at serious risk. Republicans need to work on dispelling that perception.
Click to expand...


Interesting post, but I really don't see how Republicans are going to reach these voters. To circle the conversation back around the restaurants cutting down on full time employees because they're now going to have to provide healthcare for them, I think it's pretty clear that neither party really has great answers for hard-working Americans in fields (construction, food-services) that don't offer full benefits. The only real way to make sure everyone is insured and that companies don't see their costs become unmanageable is to offer universal one-payer healthcare- tricare for all. As long as American businesses are primarily responsible for paying for their employee's healthcare, they're going to be at a disadvantage to businesses in country's where the cost is distributed across the entire society.
 
Whiskeyjack

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
IrishLax said:
I think the Republican party doesn't need a huge retooling... they just need to back off of some of the more hardline stances and choose a working class group to champion/cater to. Right now everyone in their group thinks that if a Republican gets in office they're going to take away all of their social protections to "cut costs" and push for a "fend for yourself" system where they'd be at serious risk. Republicans need to work on dispelling that perception.
Click to expand...

I touched on this earlier, but I don't see how the GOP can easily change like that. It's obvious to everyone in Washington that our welfare system is permanent, and not even the party of "small government" has been able to advance a politically feasible plan for reforming it. The only real difference between the parties at this point is over social issues, and the GOP just lost that battle big time. If they ditch the social conservatism in order to appeal to a broader base, how exactly are they different from the Democrats?

IrishinSyria said:
Interesting post, but I really don't see how Republicans are going to reach these voters. To circle the conversation back around the restaurants cutting down on full time employees because they're now going to have to provide healthcare for them, I think it's pretty clear that neither party really has great answers for hard-working Americans in fields (construction, food-services) that don't offer full benefits. The only real way to make sure everyone is insured and that companies don't see their costs become unmanageable is to offer universal one-payer healthcare- tricare for all. As long as American businesses are primarily responsible for paying for their employee's healthcare, they're going to be at a disadvantage to businesses in country's where the cost is distributed across the entire society.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. While single payor wouldn't be my first choice for a national healthcare model, it would be far better than the status quo. And to be honest, I think that's why Obamacare's structure encourages businesses to dump their employees into the healthcare exchanges. The Democrats wanted Medicare for all, but they couldn't do it directly, so designed Obamacare to get us there in the end anyway.
 
I

irish1958

Príomh comhairleoir
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
112
IrishLax said:
Had a really interesting conversation today with the one English speaking foreman on one of my jobs while waiting for a late concrete truck...

He said literally everyone he knows in his community voted for Obama. Why? Not because of social issues like gay marriage, abortion, etc. or anything like... or because they identified with him at all because he's a minority... but because, in his words, working class people in his shoes really care about things like social safety nets/universal healthcare and you have to vote in your best interest. They work relatively high injury risk jobs AND have high turnover in their industry. Contractor work forces surge and contract job to job... year to year... and especially hard when their is economic uncertainty.

Succinctly, in his shoes you'd have to be completely not self-interested and/or crazy to support the Republican platform. Also, these people are some of the hardest working I've ever met... certainly not the rhetorical "welfare leech" most conservatives like to paint that group of people as.

I think the Republican party doesn't need a huge retooling... they just need to back off of some of the more hardline stances and choose a working class group to champion/cater to. Right now everyone in their group thinks that if a Republican gets in office they're going to take away all of their social protections to "cut costs" and push for a "fend for yourself" system where they'd be at serious risk. Republicans need to work on dispelling that perception.
Click to expand...
How can they dispell that perception if they keep putting up candidates who say that is exactly what they will do if they are elected (Merdock in Indiana for example)?
 
E

enrico514

New member
Messages
1,188
Reaction score
45
IrishJayhawk said:
There's some wisdom in allowing the automatic cuts to happen for a few days or weeks. They take place very slowly, so the impact should be minimal (although maybe investors would freak out and the Stock Market would plunge). Once that happens, the house republicans can vote only for tax cuts on the middle class and maintain their Grover Norquist pledge.
Click to expand...

They will institute a one time wealth tax to get around their pledge...
 
GoIrish41

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
enrico514 said:
They will institute a one time wealth tax to get around their pledge...
Click to expand...

As long as the pledge is in place, the GOP will continue to appear inflexible. IMHO, it is part of an overall bad message that turns people away from the party. That said, I think if there are enough loopholes (along with entitlement reforms) to close on the wealthy to avert the fiscal cliff, it is in the best interest of the country for the Dems to accept this path. The stakes are too high for an ideological standoff over tax rates. The focus should be on raising revenue, however we can get there. It seems that Boener is willing to accept closure of loopholes instead of raising tax rates on the wealthy. It preserves "the pledge" that the GOP apparently feels is politically beneficial.

In the long term though, this pledge will continue to be a drag on the republicans. They would be better served to sever their linkage to Grover Norquist sooner rather than later as the begin to rework their party into one which voters might find appealing.
 
phgreek

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
In Lou I Trust said:
Anyone hear about this? Apparently 20 states have begun petitions asking for permission to secede from the US. A little obnoxious but interesting at the very least.

Secession petitions filed in 20 states | The Lookout - Yahoo! News
Click to expand...

ugh...I'm as pissed as the next guy...I think the debates clearly show the President as a guy who has disdain and disrespect for his opponents...not exaclty the basis for reaching across the aisle. I believe he and Mr. Reid are undertaking to change the rules in the Senate...I think the president never had a thought he couldn't picture as an Executive Order...add to that I'm not a fan of his ideology, so yea, I get the frustration...but this is not productive.

It looks like Texas will force a response...but no one else.
 
BobD

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
As you're driving through, the Texas landscape looks more like Mexico anyways.
 
Last edited:
BobD

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
Since we are talking about this kind of stuff, I wish California could be split into Northern and Southern California.
 
In Lou I Trust

In Lou I Trust

Offseason gon' be long
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
188
What could, say, Texas' secession from the US mean for the state and its residents? Anyone know the particulars of a situation like this?
 
IrishinSyria

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,042
Reaction score
1,920
In Lou I Trust said:
What could, say, Texas' secession from the US mean for the state and its residents? Anyone know the particulars of a situation like this?
Click to expand...

Descent into utter poverty as the oil industry and military pull out faster than a 16 year old after homecoming.
 
In Lou I Trust

In Lou I Trust

Offseason gon' be long
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
188
socal.jpg
 
BobD

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
Northern California would be the richest state in the union. Southern California would be paying more for water than gas.
 
Jebediah Springfield

Jebediah Springfield

...
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
237
Lol I was talking to a guy from Humboldt and he said for sheer # of pot plants the San Bernadino Mtns has surpassed them.

And you forgot chicks with silicon boobs. Big hit in the South lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top