« Scalia and Kennedy are old | Main | Blizzard »

November 07, 2012

Comments

The Republican Party is effectively dead. There is one last battle to fight - the midterm elections. If Republicans can gain control of the Senate, we can stop the Supreme Court nominees that may occur in the last half of Obama's term.

Romney lost the election in the Great Lakes states - NY, PA, OH, IN, MI, IL, WI, MN, plus Iowa. Of these states, only NY and probably IL were clearly destined for the Obama camp - the rest were up for grabs, at least to some extent. Many of these states have Republican legislatures and governors. But Romney carried only IN. Romney's failure to mobilize the white vote caused his downfall. For example, the Iowa electorate is 93% white - Romney needed only 54% of the white vote to carry the state, yet he still lost. You can forget the Hispanic vote - it's not a big factor in the Great Lakes region (where I live), and, anyway, the difference between the top and bottom of the range for this segment for recent GOP candidates amounts to only about 1% of the total votes, and Hispanic voters are not very numerous in many swing states, except Florida, where many of them are Cubans and mostly vote Republican.

[HS: Evangelicals will say that Romney wasn't "conservative" enough to bring out the "base."]

HS, what realistic solutions do you have for the Republican party?

Or are there no realistic solutions?

My guess is that the Republicans will become a regional party of the Southern/Mid-Western white men. Republicans are too stubborn to change. They have been talking about getting more Hispanics/Blacks/Women into the party for a while but the extreme right will have none of that. The Republican primaries ensure that only the most hardcore conservatives can get nominated.

Oh, well.

This started last night. I was watching CNN and a Latina woman with a heavy accent, who inexplicably was also a Republican strategist (5th column?), was haranguing conservatives about being wrong on immigration and amnesty.

Also, and this was on Fox News too, many Republican-leaning pundits were talking about the new leaders of the party and maybe 1 out of 6 names was a white male.

Serious question: Is Romney/Ryan the last all white-male ticket in history?

Actually, I think what you predicted is that they'd be planning a Romney inauguration.

The Catholic church is very pro immigration because Hispanics are all Catholics. Ironically this is the worst possible thing for their more prole white constituents (Catholics tend to be southern european and Irish who came over later and are more prole then WASP or Nordic whites).

It's interesting that Obama won amongst Catholics, which you'ld think would be a traditional religious segment.

In mass the Sunday before the election Catholics were told to:

1) Vote for candidates against abortion.

2) Vote in support of pro-immigration referendums.

the days when whites can in good conscience and relative insulation vote based on ideology or economics are rapidly coming to a close. the force vectors are converging and pushing whites to vote based on ethnic identity. this election was a last gasp for those working class whites, especially in the midwest, to safely express their disappointment with republican economic policies like free trade and transnational globalism. in future, they won't have that luxury.

"Is Romney/Ryan the last all white-male ticket in history?"


Yes said so myself. That's why it was so important for them to win. This was a very historic election for the wrong reasons.

"the days when whites can in good conscience and relative insulation vote based on ideology or economics are rapidly coming to a close. the force vectors are converging and pushing whites to vote based on ethnic identity. this election was a last gasp for those working class whites, especially in the midwest, to safely express their disappointment with republican economic policies like free trade and transnational globalism. in future, they won't have that luxury."

Problem with whites voting as an ethnic block is that liberal whites don't really care for conservative whites (and vise versa).

That is why I kind of laugh when posters talk about implementing a "Sailer Strategy." It is tough, if not impossible, to implement when there are natural divisions within the white electorate.

If I'm going to vote for a party that's pro-Hispanic and pro-abortion, I might as well vote for the Democrats, because they also promise me lots of free stuff.

"Just a little to the right of the Democrats, if at all, on immigration and abortion" is a recipe for doom and irrelevance for the Republicans. The Republicans won't pick up any Democrats and they will lose Republicans.

Yesterday I found this "gem" on the Internet "Dear black, gay, hispanic, poor, liberal people of the United States, if Romney wins the election - feel free to come over! Sincerely, Europe".

Am I allowed to change it to "Dear white middle class people, if Obama wins ...", since I'm from Europe?

"Republicans will probably also double down on the anti-abortion stuff"

I don't know. The two senate seats in Indiana and Missouri should have been cake-walks for Republicans. The two candidates stepped in it with stupid comments about rape and abortion, and they got dropped like bad habits. Admittedly there was no love loss between them and the establishment Republicans, they were Tea Party Republicans, but if voters cared they would have done OK regardless of party inside baseball.

"That is why I kind of laugh when posters talk about implementing a "Sailer Strategy." It is tough, if not impossible, to implement when there are natural divisions within the white electorate."

whites as a race are more ideologically diverse than other races. as such, when they are the significant majority in any nation, they tend to evolve fractious politics. this is not necessarily a bad thing. but it is a bad thing when they are a shrinking majority heading toward minority status in a sea of intrinsically antagonistic groups who would love to oust whites from power.

so the future of whites in america depends to a great extent on whether their genetic disposition to ideological diversity will continue in the face of a growing anti-white threat from competing groups, or whether the environmental pressures from racial diversity will be stronger than whites' genetic inclinations and push whites into something resembling a racial solidarity.

romney's improvement over mccain among white voters is a hint that the latter is happening.

But the democrats are so dumb, too. The black and hispanic voters aren't going to vote for white democrats either. Minorities won't need white overlords if they can put up their own candidates.

The Sailer Strategy hasn't materialized because things haven't gotten bad enough yet. Decades of tough on crime laws and white flight have enabled a cozy lifestyle for many Caucasians.

"Dude, I called it!"

The Republicans since taking the 2010 mid-terms, have acted like the People will be so glad to get rid of Obama, they'd implement the entire Republican wish-list to get him out. They underestimated how much people don't really want the hard line on abortion, the Grover Norquist tax pledge, and two trillion in Defense spending when there's so much better things to do.

"But the democrats are so dumb, too. The black and hispanic voters aren't going to vote for white democrats either. Minorities won't need white overlords if they can put up their own candidates."

That was one of the thoughts of the Jewish Democratic Bronx DA in Tom Wolfe's Bonfire of the Vanities.

It doesn't matter what position the GOP takes because the democrats control the mass media and will us it to vilify them anyway. The Republicans weren't offering a "hard line" on abortion at all. The Akin/Murdouck comments were very mild. But when your enemies control the media, "rape is a gift from god" is the message that people hear.

I am suspicious of this "GOP is dead" meme. They said the same thing in 2008, and the 2010 midterms would seem to disagree.

Also, the Democrats cheated BIG this time.

HS is right.

I was listening to Rush this morning just to get a feel for what he was going to say (I never listen to Rush) and the Latino push is coming.

What is funny though is that Rush said that Republicans have alrady been pandering for the Latino and women vote (true) but he was at a loss for why women rejected this pandering.

Rush praised Marc Rubio so you know that is coming. They think they can try one more time to be like the Liberals to win. One more election in 2016 under Marc Rubio and then the real end of the GOP shall come. That is, unless the Ron Paul Libertarians take over the GOP in the primaries.

The Sailer Strategy can work, but is hinged on more economic depression and violence from NAMs to be taken seriously: white women need to feel scared for them to vote for white men.

"As I predicted in the blog post I wrote early this morning around 1:30 AM, Republican bigwigs are saying that the party most appeal to Hispanics and minorities. Karl Rove, Lindsey Graham, Newt Gingrich and Ari Fleischer all say that."

Most of those figures have been saying that for the last 10 years. The problem is the Tea Party base of the Republican party. Rick Perry, governor of a state with a lot of Hispanics, is more open minded on immigration, and it cost him in the Republican primaries.

"And Marco Rubio is joining the chorus and positioning himself for 2016."

Marco Rubio has a dream act alternative, but it is a non-starter in the Republican controlled House and can probably only get a handful of Senate Republicans like Lindsey Graham to support it.

The question is will the Tea Party still dominate the Republican primaries in 2016? At the presidential level, I think the Republicans nominated the candidate with the best shot of beating Obama, but this is mostly because I think the rest of the field was so weak. In the Senate the Tea Party clearly cost Republicans a couple of Senate seats by nominating extreme candidates.

To win in 2016, Republicans need better policy positions that appeal to women and minories, and they need better candidates.

"To win in 2016, Republicans need better policy positions that appeal to women and minories, and they need better candidates."

describe, in such a way, these better policy positions that republicans need to adopt to better appeal to women and minorities that doesn't ape democrat policies and relegate the GOP to a party that is a facsimile of their ideological opponent.
not holding breath...

HS,

The Republicans seem incapable of presenting a coherent argument of why they should even exist. The muddle their message of smaller government by calling on the government to track pregnant women. They muddle their message of lower spending by refusing to make any budget cuts.

The U.S. is fated to become a one party state. You live in NYC and should recognize that the Democrats can easily function is a one party state where no one discusses spending, taxes, or policy.

I'm not sure what the Republicans can do. The old Reagan Democrats hated abortion and hippies and all that. Most of them are old now and their kids don't hate abortion so much and think people shrieking about gay marriage are nuts. And they're poor and possibly over educated and in debt.

Mitt basically told 47% of the country he's got nothing for them. What are they supposed to do, say, "damn, he's right, I am a pile of dung. The man has my vote."

Anyway, George Bush destroyed the Republican party years ago. I think next time a strong libertarian or 3rd party will pop up.

Just heard Hannity praising Amnesty and the need to appeal to "naturally conservative" Hispanics.

The divide between fiscal and social conservatives (including conservative leaning independents) is what undid this election. Mitt was not socially conservative enough for the fundies nor socially moderate enough (thanks to media manipulation) for the fiscals ("rape is god's will," blah blah blah). I have to wonder if the MSM intentionally pursued a divide and conquer strategy. And don't poo poo the notion of courting Hispanics. I've often found it ironic that dems are so rabid to naturalize the throngs of illegal Mexicans in this country when many said Mexicans are more catholic than the pope. It would not be a solid constituency to be sure. If you research advertising strategies to latino consumers you'll find that their social conservatism is carefully targeted. For instance you'll never see a single mom on Spanish TV ads (unlike the constant single white moms on anglo TV).

I don't see the dems coughing up another messiah after Obama. What it is with the media and this guy I'll never understand, but I don't see them worshiping at the feet of another, like they have with him, any time soon. There are plenty of black politicians the MSM couldn't care less about. When the GOP runs against a non-messiah candidate in 2016... after the economy is in worse shape and god knows what else has taken place, it could be the rise of the phoenix.

"describe, in such a way, these better policy positions that republicans need to adopt to better appeal to women and minorities that doesn't ape democrat policies and relegate the GOP to a party that is a facsimile of their ideological opponent."

Right. Two political parties cannot occupy the same ideological real estate. If the GOP goes left - which I fully expect it to - the Democrats will go even further left. Then we'll have a religious, quasi-socialist party (the GOP) and a secular, quasi-communist party (the Democrats).

Where then does a believer in small government, minding your own business, and not getting into stupid wars go?

It doesn't really matter who the GOP runs. No matter what, he'll be tarred as an evil, Nazi-like neo-Confederate who wants to kill minorities and enslave women.

Another issue Republicans need to consider is the alternate reality created by conservative media outlets. The majority of Americans don't read, listen or watch conservative media. Republican rhetoric and policy positions rooted in the alternate reality of conservative media can sound out of touch to people living in the real world.

Kind of hard to pursue the Sailer strategy when you're too busy pissing off blue collar Midwestern whites by actively rooting for the demise of the American auto industry and freaking out suburban moms and young women with the crazy religious right stuff.

Most voters are women and women are almost always supporters of abortion and birth control. They want and need the power to control their bodies to pursue careers and no women will vote against their self-interest.

It's unfortunate that so many whipped betas are easily manipulated to voting against their interest.

Btw 90% of Catholic women use birth control. Time for conservatives to acknowledge that abortion and birth control are taboo issues. Courting Hispanic and women voters are the only salvation for this party as society is going to continue to become socially liberal.

If Hispanics were natural conservatives, the Democrats would have deported all of them and built an electric fence on the border.

By the way, Puerto Rico just voted to join the United States. The United States has never refused to admit a territory as a state. The Democrats might get a few more electoral votes in 2016.

"and freaking out suburban moms and young women with the crazy religious right stuff."

amazing how many people buy into the msm narrative. fact: two -- count them, TWO -- congressmen made weird religious comments about rape and abortion. romney is on record multiple times as being supportive (however poorly reasoned) for hiring women and closing the "pay gap".

in contrast, you could fill a phone book with the number of weird and off-putting anti-white comments obama's reverend wright makes in one sermon.

as pete z wrote above, the msm is a propaganda arm of the equalist party, and will smear repubs with whatever weapon is at hand or can be created from whole cloth.

I look forward to having two political parties in the US: La Raza (with non-Raza auxiliaries) and the Democrat/Communist.

I can pass: soy Tejano.

'two -- count them, TWO -- congressmen made weird religious comments about rape and abortion'

Lol@someone who thinks that two prominent, experienced, seasoned politicians making such insane remarks on the national stage somehow =/= widespread belief among the key demographic.

Yes, CH, keep telling yourself that. It's all the dreaded MSM brainwashing people. It's that kind of thinking that led you people to build your own Drudge-Fox-Rush-rightie blogosphere media ecosystem that ended up being an echo chamber completely divorced from reality. Half of you psyched yourselves into thinking all the polls were skewed and that the rest of the country shared the hard right narrative of Obama as retarded Marxist Muslim Kenyan. Let me know how that works out for you.

Ooops. Wrong link but that old one reads well today as it did four years ago. Peter's take on 2012 isn't different from ours.

"For a proper conservative, American national politics is a desert. You can choose between declared liberals and neo-cons who are liberal on all important issues. And that's it. Or there's dear old Ron Paul, who is another sort of liberal, really. But he's not important anyway. There's nobody who is really socially conservative, above all nobody who will act( it's decades too late anyway) to end the lax immigration politics which have revolutionized the country and will render it unrecognizable within 30 years. There's nobody who will rescue the married family, or protect and recreate manufacturing industry so that ordinary people have proper honest work to do again, or reform the schools, or devise a foreign policy that actually makes the country safer . . . The "Romney is a raging conservative" claim must be an effort to make a dull contest between two mediocrities, for an over-rated office that isn't really all that powerful, appear more interesting than it is." - Peter Hitchens

'for an over-rated office that isn't really all that powerful, appear more interesting than it is'

Lol, yeah...the POTUS is somehow 'not all that powerful.' O-kaaaaaaaaaaaaay. Political rationalization hamsters at work!

"Yes, CH, keep telling yourself that. It's all the dreaded MSM brainwashing people."

not brainwashing. brainmassaging.

"It's that kind of thinking that led you people to build your own Drudge-Fox-Rush-rightie blogosphere media ecosystem"

as opposed to the fair and balanced msnbc-cnn-reatuers-ap-nytimes-wahspost-etc etc etc media ecosystem, which as we all know, are the very standard bearers of fair and objective journalism, filled to the rafters as they are with reporters and pundits and newsmakers who don't vote 87% straight ticket leftoid.

"that ended up being an echo chamber completely divorced from reality."

great. so you want to fight one echo chamber by... shoving the other echo chamber down everyone's throats.

ya know, there's a reason fox news came into existence in the first place. think about it.

"Lol, yeah...the POTUS is somehow 'not all that powerful.' O-kaaaaaaaaaaaaay. Political rationalization hamsters at work!"


He contends culture and civil society are more important than politics. If there hadn't been a massive cultural change in America Obama wouldn't be president. Obama really represents the radical 60's and everything the FBI's COINTELPRO fought.

CH, how did Nate Silver's predictions turn out as compared to Rove, Krauthammer, George Will, et al?

Yeah, exactly.

The mainstream media has a lot of problems, but the alternative isn't to invest in an alternative structure that tells the Republican base comforting lies. You guys gave away the Senate and lost seats that should have been easy wins because you nominated people with no appeal outside the hardcore right wing. That wasn't the MSM that did that. You guys did it to yourselves by believing your own bullshit.

'If there hadn't been a massive cultural change in America Obama wouldn't be president. Obama really represents the radical 60's and everything the FBI's COINTELPRO fought'

Seems like an empty point. Of course culture and societal change influence politics to a great degree-------and?

Contending that Obama represents the radical side of the 1960's is a bit ridiculous. He's about as liberal as Kennedy or Johnson----America seemed to prosper under that type of outlook.

Despite all the belyaching about income dependent welfare---I displayed a chart some time ago that showed minimal proportional budgetary cost from these programs.

The big drains on government money are programs that people pay into---Medicare and Social Security.

Now, with a knowledge of HBD...the idea of Social Security and Medicare seems pretty spot-on. People will fail to make rational decisions because they have lower future-time orientation, therefore, programs like these are necessary.

@ Conquistador

I know of a guy who is from Spain and is a Spanish teacher here in NYC. He wants to teach White Americans the proper Spanish language spoken in his homeland and this was met with criticism from his collegues, whom of course are liberals who think espanol spoken in the el barrio is the lingua franca when it comes to Spanish.

"Seems like an empty point. Of course culture and societal change influence politics to a great degree-------and?" - Insider


Joe McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee were vindicated after all given the 60's radicalism and beyond.


"Contending that Obama represents the radical side of the 1960's is a bit ridiculous. He's about as liberal as Kennedy or Johnson----America seemed to prosper under that type of outlook." - Insider


The guy is the bastard spawn of a foreign inter-racial paring. He grew up in a single mother household and lived overseas a lot. He probably embraced Islam at some point while living abroad. Later on in life the guy would befriend far left intellectuals and attend a black nationalist church. Obama's mentor (Reverend Wright) has a lot of opinions that don't jive with most people. Obama has had a very unusual upbringing for a president. The first of it's kind really. He embodies everything the 1960's championed. I don't think you really grasp cultural Marxism.

"he'll be tarred as an evil, Nazi-like neo-Confederate who wants to kill minorities and enslave women."

Well geez where do we find this awesome candidate who all good HBDers can get behind? =)

BTW, another casualty yesterday was the Jewish version of Marco Rubio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Mandel

Maybe the GOP should field a candidate offering to cut taxes. That might help. This a policy idea that enjoys wide support from scholars like Sean Hannity.

'Maybe the GOP should field a candidate offering to cut taxes. That might help. This a policy idea that enjoys wide support from scholars like Sean Hannity.'

I lol'd.

Well, Conquistador, our viewpoints of history radically diverge, so...

So you're depending on the same people who got us into this mess to get us out of it? America is turning into a third world balkanized one party state, the Republicans not only done nothing to stop it, they have often encouraged it and cheered it on. Dropping abortion and giving amnesty will do nothing to stop it. Demographics are destiny, something one of the few true conservatives in the media has been preaching for over a decade. Oddly enough, the neocons have done everything to ruin his career.


"BTW, another casualty yesterday was the Jewish version of Marco Rubio:"

A Jew who isn't HYP (Prole), is a Republican, and a lack of Jewish support because of this. 3 strikes and he was out.

"A Jew who isn't HYP (Prole), is a Republican, and a lack of Jewish support because of this. 3 strikes and he was out."

Fourth strike: served in the US military (prole).

The problem with the GOP is that it is a capitalist party which means that it supports cheap labor even if that involves replacing U.S. citizens with illegal immigrants or sending whole factories overseas to places like China.

You should do a post trying to honestly assess the single-issue prolife voter, just as you have analyzed the Shias in Tegeran and others. I think you do not understand that the essence of the single issue prolife voter is that they consider themselves the humble descendants of the great prophets of old whose mission in life was not to win votes or curry the favor of kings and crowds but to ward off the anger of the Lord against a sinning nation, by patiently bearing witness to the truth. Of course, as human beings, the prolife voters are profoundly saddened by the increased physical pain and loneliness caused to human beings by the abortion forces' political victories, but they will never ever ever join a coalition led by a pro-abortion politician. For them, the silver linings of this election are (a) the elderly Republican semi-pro-lifer is now guaranteed not to get 8 years and to put his 5 Souters on the Supreme Court (b) several elderly unattractive Senators know they are in the Senate only because of their championing of life-ending procedures of innocent children and because of their gleeful and outrageously sinful jumping on their opponents for awkwardly defending said innocent children, and this is a guilty knowledge that far outweighs whatever joys the status of being an unattractive elderly Senator qua Senator might hold and (c) the Republican who rarely mentioned partial birth abortion, rarely mentioned subsidized targeted abortions, and spent most of his adult life, even as a religious celebrity, as a pro-abortion politician, lost. And lost while being guided by his probably pro-choice campaign advisers.

If Mitt Romney were to release his tax returns would he face prison?

I think the problems go lots deeper than demographics changes.

"You know your party is in trouble when people ask did the rape guy win, and you have to ask which one." -- Alec Baldwin.

Plus, with 20/20 hindsight would the Romney campaign have announced their economic strategy for pulling America out of the Bush Depression was to unleash the awesome power of coal just as people were learning new weather words like "hybrid storm?"

"There will be no shortage of voices saying that Romney lost only because he wasn't "conservative" enough..."

Romney is a SWPL turncoat who joins the prole faction, and this backfires like Jetfire in Transformers with the decepticons.

With 20/20 hindsight, could this man not look like a complete idiot to many many voters, regardless their demographic?

""President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans..." - Mitt Romney, nomination speech.

"Republicans are too stubborn to change."

Republican pols want their bread buttered, same as anyone who goes into politics instead of getting a real job. My only concern for the GOP is not that they won't want to change, but that they possess no figure with sufficient stature to reorient the national party without splintering it over some cherished tenet of social or economic policy.

I suggested in a previous post that I believe the GOP needs to convince Hispanics to vote as rural prole whites do; that is, as social conservatives rather than poors. Winning over a new (and growing) demographic is less dangerous than selling out on issues like abortion or the free market, which would cost the party a great deal of voter and financial support respectively.

That said, I consider this a long-term goal. The national elections of 2016 are eminently winnable by the GOP as currently constituted. Just don't pick a presidential candidate who's a stiff-ass New England lib with a weird religion and a congenital inability to tell people what they want to hear. And arrange a convenient accident for any downticket candidate who can't frame his anti-abortion position in a way that doesn't seem ghoulish, especially when the Dems are running on a "Republicans hate women" theme.

Around 52% of the population identifies as pro-life, how does this stance lose elections for republicans?

The idea that hispanics are social conservatives is laughably naive.

Free trade only works in the sense that you can buy worthless merchandise very cheaply.

Rich people don't create jobs, Demand creates jobs, take away the guy who put together facebook and someone else will come along just like I can always replace my csr with another and my boss can always replace me.

Rich people do destroy jobs and are a corrosive on this country.

The 6 heirs to the walmart fortune are worth something like more than the first 150 million americans as a reward for doing absolutely nothing except being the result os sam waltons probably bizarre sex games. Republicans are perfectly okay with this.

Republicans do have a problem with a guy who's been unemployed for a few months getting anything for doing nothing (unless of course that unemployed guy is in Israel).

Republicans lose because they deserve to lose. They deserve to lose because they are selfish morons.

I don't think it has anything to do hispanic or "black" appeal. I'm sorry but Mitt Romney was just not a good choice. Hopefully by 2016, we will get it right and pick a better candidate. Also it doesn't our case when we have loon boons like Donald Trump making a joke of the party. It's time for us to get serious here. Thankfully it's not like Obama can run again.

The comments to this entry are closed.