Jump to content

Does The Republican Party Have Any Vision Or Plan For The Future?


Recommended Posts

I watched the speech by Obama last night and the Republican response. My feeling was that if this was the best the Republicans can do then we're in for 8 Obama years and maybe more Dems to come. The successful Presidential candidate over the last few decades has been one who can articulate a vision for the future to the American people. It's surprising how many candidates don't get that. It's not enough to be against what the other guy's doing. You have to have an inspirational vision and plan of your own. So far I'm not seeing anything resembling that from the Republican side of the aisle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 215
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The biggest problem is an uninformed public; the type of people who vote for slogans like "hope and change" instead of trying to understand economics and policy.It's next to impossible for a realist to get elected to any major office, because voters are stupid and want to be told that the government will take care of them. Most voters don't want to think hard enough to even realize that every dollar the government gives them is $1.50 taken from their pocket. If you try to explain that to people, they just cover their ears and go la-la-la-la-la.So are there any Republicans with a vision? Very few, because they can't get elected.I get the feeling that if you ran a campaign where all you did was show pictures of cute kittens, puppies, and babies, you'd get elected, whereas if you tried to explain the economic basis for your beliefs and policies, you'd get about 3 votes -- you, your wife, and some guy who doesn't understand voting.I keep hoping the internet will change that, but in many ways it seems to be making it worse. Check the number of views of the Obama girl videos vs anything by an economist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're wrong on that H. Reagan had a great way of communicating his vision for America. And I guess I miss that in the Republican Party. I voted for Reagan. And I might be inclined to vote again for a Republican that could communicate an overall vision for America that I could buy into. It's what McCain was really missing although he had a concrete block called George W Bush around his neck which didn't help any. And it's really not enough to be attractive although kitties and puppies are cute. There has to be some sense that you know where you're going and have some idea of how to get there. And also the goal has to be in tune with where the people are at the moment. It's something that both Reagan and Obama did very well. I'm not saying Republicans-bad. What I'm saying is that I don't see anyone with enough of a vision for the future and a plan to communicate that vision to the American people in the Republican Party.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The biggest problem is an uninformed public; the type of people who vote for slogans like "hope and change" instead of trying to understand economics and policy.It's next to impossible for a realist to get elected to any major office, because voters are stupid and want to be told that the government will take care of them. Most voters don't want to think hard enough to even realize that every dollar the government gives them is $1.50 taken from their pocket. If you try to explain that to people, they just cover their ears and go la-la-la-la-la.So are there any Republicans with a vision? Very few, because they can't get elected.I get the feeling that if you ran a campaign where all you did was show pictures of cute kittens, puppies, and babies, you'd get elected, whereas if you tried to explain the economic basis for your beliefs and policies, you'd get about 3 votes -- you, your wife, and some guy who doesn't understand voting.I keep hoping the internet will change that, but in many ways it seems to be making it worse. Check the number of views of the Obama girl videos vs anything by an economist.
and you call me the elitist. I agree 100% with this post of course. I wanted the McCain Obama election to end in June because I could not take it anymore. the neverending pandering and the dumbing down of our policies and ideals. its pretty sickening (and a great argument for doing something/anything new with our educational system).being fair, nimue actually makes a pretty good point here. The GOP is short on electable people right now. Jindal could be the next "guy" but he was just ok last night. Palin is a trainwreck waiting to happen.Reagan was the last Republican to be able to communicate well with the American people. Bush I was terrible at it. Bush II was obviously an interesting communicazizer. Lucky for him he got to run the 2nd time against Kerry.
Link to post
Share on other sites
and you call me the elitist. I agree 100% with this post of course. I wanted the McCain Obama election to end in June because I could not take it anymore. the neverending pandering and the dumbing down of our policies and ideals. its pretty sickening (and a great argument for doing something/anything new with our educational system).being fair, nimue actually makes a pretty good point here. The GOP is short on electable people right now. Jindal could be the next "guy" but he was just ok last night. Palin is a trainwreck waiting to happen.Reagan was the last Republican to be able to communicate well with the American people. Bush I was terrible at it. Bush II was obviously an interesting communicazizer. Lucky for him he got to run the 2nd time against Kerry.
Actually, I just explained why people were accusing Obama of being elitist, I don't think I ever accused you of it. And I don't even think I said I agreed with the accusations against Obama, just why the charges were leveled and how I could see the point.At any rate, yeah, the R's have few leaders. There's Ron Paul, who can articulate his position and has a record of backing it up, but the R's don't want to hear it because they care more about power than about principles. There's Jindal, who people inexplicably like, but to me he's just Dubya with darker skin -- big on promise, low on substance. Maybe Gov Sanford, who is quite articulate and likeable, but he's got a steep hill to climb, and he has to overcome the vanilla old white guy problem.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I just explained why people were accusing Obama of being elitist, I don't think I ever accused you of it. And I don't even think I said I agreed with the accusations against Obama, just why the charges were leveled and how I could see the point.At any rate, yeah, the R's have few leaders. There's Ron Paul, who can articulate his position and has a record of backing it up, but the R's don't want to hear it because they care more about power than about principles. There's Jindal, who people inexplicably like, but to me he's just Dubya with darker skin -- big on promise, low on substance. Maybe Gov Sanford, who is quite articulate and likeable, but he's got a steep hill to climb, and he has to overcome the vanilla old white guy problem.
Actually for having some substance and a certain amount of presence, Bob Corker is pretty decent. Been watching him on the Senate Banking Committee for some time now and he's articulate, intelligent and fairly reasonable. Needs a bit more fire to really be a decent candidate but certainly I'd put him in the running if he so chooses. I really don't like Jindal at all. I do like Ron Paul but he's really not got much chance. Don't know much about Gov. Sanford.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The biggest problem is an uninformed public; the type of people who vote for slogans like "hope and change" instead of trying to understand economics and policy.
Do you really think it is Dems who vote for slogans? It seems that all the Repubs do is create misleading slogans and catch-phrases. They always cater to the lowest common denominator.For example, how stupid does this Repub look, trying to mock scientifically valid research to make it look ridiculous:http://www.livescience.com/environment/090...monitoring.htmlPalin, of course, came off like a total idiot with her attempt at attacking science (to cater to the uneducated and Christian religious zealots):http://www.livescience.com/health/081104-b...ruit-flies.htmlStill wonder why the Repub party is a dying party, and that most new voters are Dems? It's because they cling to outdated, backwards values and ideas, and play Americans for fools. Without the religious vote, they'd totally be wiped out.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I watched the speech by Obama last night and the Republican response. My feeling was that if this was the best the Republicans can do then we're in for 8 Obama years and maybe more Dems to come. The successful Presidential candidate over the last few decades has been one who can articulate a vision for the future to the American people. It's surprising how many candidates don't get that. It's not enough to be against what the other guy's doing. You have to have an inspirational vision and plan of your own. So far I'm not seeing anything resembling that from the Republican side of the aisle.
This election was not a good place for a solid Republican to run. You had too much going against you, with 8 years of Bush etc.I have no doubt that many qualified republicans are sitting on the sidelines, waiting for a more level feild to jump in the race.This is the reason we ended up with Clinton, just over a year before the 92 elections, Bush 1 had an 80% approval rating. Most 'top end' democrats sat out, instead of shooting their one chance with a huge disadvantage. Along comes a crooked politician from Arkansaw, and he's lst man standing just as Bush signs a new tax law that put the nail in the coffin for the S&Ls.So let's not assume that the best Republicans ran this year, they didn't, and we ended up with McCain.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you really think it is Dems who vote for slogans? It seems that all the Repubs do is create misleading slogans and catch-phrases. They always cater to the lowest common denominator.For example, how stupid does this Repub look, trying to mock scientifically valid research to make it look ridiculous:http://www.livescience.com/environment/090...monitoring.htmlPalin, of course, came off like a total idiot with her attempt at attacking science (to cater to the uneducated and Christian religious zealots):http://www.livescience.com/health/081104-b...ruit-flies.htmlStill wonder why the Repub party is a dying party, and that most new voters are Dems? It's because they cling to outdated, backwards values and ideas, and play Americans for fools. Without the religious vote, they'd totally be wiped out.
No, Dems vote for feelings, because no facts support any of their programs.And lucky for us the religious vote is still the single greatest voting block in this country. Which is why Obama could only get 54% of the vote with EVERYTHING going for him.And now his naive lack of experience is bringing down the economy faster than anything else short of a terrorist attack.But good luck with your fantasy world
Link to post
Share on other sites
No, Dems vote for feelings, because no facts support any of their programs.And lucky for us the religious vote is still the single greatest voting block in this country. Which is why Obama could only get 54% of the vote with EVERYTHING going for him.And now his naive lack of experience is bringing down the economy faster than anything else short of a terrorist attack.But good luck with your fantasy world
Science backs many of the Dems programs, it's your problem if you don't think science = facts.54% is a landslide when compared to other elections.as for the economy, wow, i didn't realize you had such a short memory. you do know that this all started and snowballed with Bush at the helm, right? Just like with Bush I, a Dem has to come into office to fix a recession.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Science backs many of the Dems programs, it's your problem if you don't think science = facts.54% is a landslide when compared to other elections.as for the economy, wow, i didn't realize you had such a short memory. you do know that this all started and snowballed with Bush at the helm, right? Just like with Bush I, a Dem has to come into office to fix a recession.
But good luck with your fantasy world
Link to post
Share on other sites

You want longer responses.... OK.

Science backs many of the Dems programs, it's your problem if you don't think science = facts.
You mean like the welfare program that Obama just re-expanded to be more like the days when multiple generations of families were on welfare? Those facts? Maybe you need to be more specific, but I think you are wrong on this.
54% is a landslide when compared to other elections.
Why would comparison to other elections be your standard? Because it suits your current argument? 54% of the 50% of people who choose to vote is not even a majority of eligible voters.
as for the economy, wow, i didn't realize you had such a short memory. you do know that this all started and snowballed with Bush at the helm, right? Just like with Bush I, a Dem has to come into office to fix a recession.
Republicans, for the most part, disowned Bush long ago, so attacking him doesn't score points. In fact, Obama is just Bush On Steroids, so the people who disliked Bush should HATE Obama. Doing more of what Bush did to get us here is throwing gasoline on a fire.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Palin, Romney, Huckabee, and Jindal.
Palin: No chance in hell she will be a president or vice president.Romney, Huckabee: Leading contenders, but they'd be disasters for the Republican party. The R's don't need Dubya Lite.Jindal: It'll be interesting to see what happens with him. Maybe all the people who were thrilled about voting for a black president will now be thrilled to vote for an Indian president.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The biggest problem is an uninformed public; the type of people who vote for slogans like "hope and change" instead of trying to understand economics and policy.It's next to impossible for a realist to get elected to any major office, because voters are stupid and want to be told that the government will take care of them. Most voters don't want to think hard enough to even realize that every dollar the government gives them is $1.50 taken from their pocket. If you try to explain that to people, they just cover their ears and go la-la-la-la-la.So are there any Republicans with a vision? Very few, because they can't get elected.I get the feeling that if you ran a campaign where all you did was show pictures of cute kittens, puppies, and babies, you'd get elected, whereas if you tried to explain the economic basis for your beliefs and policies, you'd get about 3 votes -- you, your wife, and some guy who doesn't understand voting.I keep hoping the internet will change that, but in many ways it seems to be making it worse. Check the number of views of the Obama girl videos vs anything by an economist.
It really makes the founding fathers even look more in-genius in they didn't want the general public to directly elect a president. We do basically assign electoral votes based on general election results of each state. It seems to me the only way to get a really competent president would be to go back and have electors select the most qualified candidate. Of course this is impractical because the whole process has been so politicized that no matter what you do now, you would end up with a different version of the same politicized process.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Palin: No chance in hell she will be a president or vice president.Romney, Huckabee: Leading contenders, but they'd be disasters for the Republican party. The R's don't need Dubya Lite.Jindal: It'll be interesting to see what happens with him. Maybe all the people who were thrilled about voting for a black president will now be thrilled to vote for an Indian president.
Other than the obvious, I don't know much about Jindal, but I think he'll have a very good shot as long as he has the money to stay in. I can't think of anyone else, maybe Gingrich? As it is, I'm not thrilled with anyone.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You want longer responses.... OK.You mean like the welfare program that Obama just re-expanded to be more like the days when multiple generations of families were on welfare? Those facts? Maybe you need to be more specific, but I think you are wrong on this.Why would comparison to other elections be your standard? Because it suits your current argument? 54% of the 50% of people who choose to vote is not even a majority of eligible voters.Republicans, for the most part, disowned Bush long ago, so attacking him doesn't score points. In fact, Obama is just Bush On Steroids, so the people who disliked Bush should HATE Obama. Doing more of what Bush did to get us here is throwing gasoline on a fire.
Henry, you're too nice a guy.Anyone dumb enough to get his info from Al jazeer, and then add it to his signature, isn't worth the time it would take to respond to.Anti-semites get no pass from me.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Other than the obvious, I don't know much about Jindal, but I think he'll have a very good shot as long as he has the money to stay in. I can't think of anyone else, maybe Gingrich? As it is, I'm not thrilled with anyone.
Personally I would prefer him to turn around LA before he takes at shot at running the country.We already have an inexperienced person with nothing but bad theories running things.Newt shot himself in the foot years ago, when the first thing he did after heading the Contract with America, his first official act was to take a huge book deal money up front.He's best as an advisor than a front man.I don't have a viable candidate now, but I think you are right, 4 years is a long ways away.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I had hopes that you fell in the ocean and couldn't get out.
Personally I would prefer him to turn around LA before he takes at shot at running the country.We already have an inexperienced person with nothing but bad theories running things.Newt shot himself in the foot years ago, when the first thing he did after heading the Contract with America, his first official act was to take a huge book deal money up front.He's best as an advisor than a front man.I don't have a viable candidate now, but I think you are right, 4 years is a long ways away.
We actually have a decent cadre of advisor-types. We have no leaders or leadership. When Reagan's last term was winding down, I looked at the field of Republican candidates and got sick to my stomach. It's been hard to like any since then -- there has been no one close to Reagan since.The whole situation makes me sad, because America is completely derailed and there is no uniting vision. There are no great ideas. I think many people subconsciously think it will take a lifetime for American to decline, when, really, a serious collapse could happen in a couple dozen months.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Newt is one of the best speakers I have ever heard...sadly I have to agree with BG on him being able to run but what an awesome President he would have been.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Henry, you're too nice a guy.Anyone dumb enough to get his info from Al jazeer, and then add it to his signature, isn't worth the time it would take to respond to.Anti-semites get no pass from me.
OMG, I just saw that. Dude needs to be bitch slap with a sand shovel.
Link to post
Share on other sites
No, Dems vote for feelings, because no facts support any of their programs.
There are personality-trait differences between democrats and republicans, but that isn't one of them. Almost everyone reasons from their gut feelings and not the other way around, and in fact republicans tend to base their decisions even more on feelings than democrats in some arenas. For example, if you interview conservatives about why they don't support gay rights, most of them cannot come up with a coherent response and eventually admit that it just feels wrong.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...