Can Rand Paul beat Hillary?

[Dyakovo]

Now I know you're just a conspiracy theorist.

Sorry to disappoint you but 9/11 was an inside job. Here are some words for thought if you are ready to leave your cave of denial and admit that some Americans leaders are not the heroes you thought they were:

http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_01.htm

http://rense.com/general57/aale.htm

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/911_a_hoax.htm

I'd say you just lost all credibility, but, well...

[Grenartia]

Sorry to disappoint you but 9/11 was an inside job. Here are some words for thought if you are ready to leave your cave of denial and admit that some Americans leaders are not the heroes you thought they were:

http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_01.htm

http://rense.com/general57/aale.htm

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/911_a_hoax.htm

I'd say you just lost all credibility, but, well...

What credibility?

[Alien Space Bats]

The thing people often forget in the western world is that demographics, and not policies and ideals, predict perfectly who wins an election. In France, the Muslim vote got François Hollande into the Élysée. In the United States, the Hispanic vote will get whoever runs for the Democrats into the White House. It's impossible for any Republican candidate to beat almost any Democratic candidate.

The Republicans draw their share of the vote from whites who, despite their young still usually voting Republican, have become too small a share of the population to win any national elections. The Democrats, at least for the time being, draw their vote from the African-Americans, the Hispanics, and a minority of whites. And while, as I demonstrated before using a source that was supposed to prove me wrong, Hispanics are actually quite likely to agree with the Republican stance on things like abortion, criminal justice and people not relying on the state too much, they associate the Republicans with the anti-immigration movement and the Democrats with the pro-immigration movement and (in some cases) with free money, and so the Democrats have their vote.

As usual, your analysis is wrong. Demographics only matter when one or the other Party utterly ignores the needs of one constituency in order to capture another. American Republicans COULD win African-American votes if they really WANTED to (Richard Nixon got over 25% of the African-American vote in 1960; had Mitt Romney won a similar share of the black vote, he'd be President today); but most lack the imagination to come up with a set of policies that would be beneficial to minorities and/or urban voters, in no small part because they've spent the last 35 years catering to anti-urban, anti-minority whites.

Interestingly enough, Rand Paul comes the closest of any modern Republican when it comes to figuring out what it would take to attract such voters to the GOP banner. He notes the way in which our criminal justice system effectively creates a "school-to-prison" pipeline through overly aggressive urban policing, unequal sentencing (especially when it comes to drug-related crimes), and the criminalization of academic offenses (i.e., sending juvenile offenders to the SRO, where they end up with the beginnings of a criminal record, when a generation or two ago they'd have simply been sent to the principal's office for a stern talk and maybe a call to their parents); as Paul correctly observes, the resultant system sharply limits African-American economic potential further on down the road.

Paul also does well when he talks about the need or African-American entrepreneurship: African-Americans are only going to get a fair break and move up the social ladder when community-based business — black-owned business — becomes predominate within the urban communities where African-Americans live.

But where Rand Paul comes up short is in drawing the outlines of a comprehensive urban policy; and indeed, this is a general failing of the Republican Party. Republicans constantly malign places like Detroit without ever even trying to compete for control of the local governments that they hold responsible for the problems in our cities. Such a strategy cannot succeed for very basic reasons, as it makes the Republicans look like outside naysayers who can't offer blacks anything except a bad word (which all too often comes across sounding too much like: "Damned idiot niggers can't run ANYTHING, let alone a city!").

And what Republicans do to blacks can't help but poison their relations with other minorities, who look at the clear disdain in which the GOP holds the African-American community and think, "So what do they think about ME, then, HUH?!?"

---

Beyond your failure to realize that GOP shortcomings within the minority community have their roots in GOP behavior (IOW, that the GOP should NOT blame minorities for being too blind or self-centered to vote Republican, but rather blame ITSELF for not finding a way to creatively apply its ideology to their situation in a way that would actually HELP them), however, there are some basic problems with your math. Whites are still a huge majority within the American polity, where they represent close to 75% of the total vote; the only reason why Republicans can't win with 60% of the white vote is because they can't manage more than 20% of the minority vote these days.

But it's not just ethnic politics that matter; demographics include religion, too. And it's here that we see the REAL division in American politics.

Minorities may vote Democratic by an 80-20 margin (and African-Americans may do so by a 90-10 margin or more), but white evangelicals — who comprise roughly 25% of the American electorate overall — vote Republican by the same 80-20 margin as minorities break towards the Democrats. In contrast, the so-called "Others & Nones" (i.e., people who respond to surveys by slef-identifying as non-religious or non-Christian) break Democratic by that same 80-20 margin; and as they form a bloc of roughly the same size as white evangelicals, it should come as no surprise that the remaining 50% of American voters split right down the middle when it comes to Party preference.

And in many ways, this is a much more important division within American politics: Non-believers and non-Christians aren't going to trust a party that sees itself as the "Party of Jesus", and religious voters aren't likely to support policies they see as sacrilegious and/or anti-Christian. What is interesting about this division is, of course, how it intersects with ETHNIC politics. African-Americans are FAR AND AWAY the most devoutly Protestant demographic bloc in America, sharing many core beliefs with white evangelicals; but the GOP seems incapable of getting around its opposition to having government do ANYTHING long enough to conceive of an effective way to run an urban area without turning it into a massive open-air prison. If they could, they might THEN be able to move onto finding common ground with the black community on social issues, and that could in turn be a total game changer as far as National politics goes.

In contrast, conservatives IMAGINE Latinos to be ready to jump on the same social ship as white evangelicals, and talk constantly about how the Hispanic community is "open" to their social conservative message. The thing is, that just ain't so. Latinos are Catholics, not Protestants; and historically Catholics are much more socially liberal than their Protestant compatriots, consistently running 8-9% more Democratic than their Protestant counterparts (and that's WITH African-American Protestants voting overwhelmingly Democratic!). Then, too, surveys show that Latinos have much greater levels of trust in government, as well as expecting more FROM government than do most whites. It is, ironically (again) the African-American community that tends to distrust government most among minorities; yet this same community has learned that State government tends to oppress the Hell out of it, leaving the Federal government as the only friend it can turn to, the only savious against oppressive State and local power. If the GOP were smart, they would stop trying to tear down the ability of the Federal government to protect minorities from such oppression, while simultaneously playing on black distrust of State and local government. From there, they would try to organize young black Republicans to take control of local government and run it in accordance with conservative principles to maximize local business opportunity, effectively creating REPUBLICAN urban political machines in the middle of many of our Nation's "bluest" States.

But the GOP lacks imagination, which is why it continues to slide further and further into the ditch as a National Party. Latinos are a natural fit within the Democratic coalition, and until Republicans realize they have to turn to black evangelical voters to compensate for the Democratic Party's growing "in" among Latinos, they're utterly doomed.

[Atlanticatia]

-snip-

You hit the nail on the head.

The GOP needs to stop blaming minority groups or irreligious people for voting Democrat by calling them "selfish" or "lazy". Republicans often imply things like "Democrats are trying to get all the black and brown people dependent on the gubmint!" This a) insults people of color & b) misses the whole issue that Republicans don't do enough to appeal to non-white people. They need to stop saying that the Democrats are being "sneaky" by appealing to more than just white people.

The GOP needs fundamental change that moderates some of its social conservative beliefs and stops supporting racism. I'm sure that if they did that, they'd . But you'll never see positive change for the GOP as long as you have Bill O'Reilly on FOX calling black people lazy or promiscuous, and denying that white privilege exists.

I think that if GOP rebrands itself like the Tories in the UK or the National Party in New Zealand, and focuses more on center-right policies(not theocracy/social conservatism), they can attract more votes from all demographics. Take the 'limited government' mantra to heart by ending the school-to-prison pipeline. The Tea Party is killing the GOP, and on the current track, it's likely that in 20 years time, as demographics change, the GOP will never win a national election again without fundamental change.

[Alien Space Bats]

The GOP needs fundamental change that moderates some of its social conservative beliefs and stops supporting racism.

Those are two different things.

I think that it would be fatal for the GOP to abandon its Christian fundamentalist nature; it relies FAR too heavily on white evangelicals for its core support. What it needs to do is remain SOCIALLY conservative while finding a way to lose its racism; it needs to add BLACK evangelicals to its WHITE evangelical base. This is why I stress a message of black economic empowerment through the establishment of community-based business, and why I stress black political power in urban areas for the sake of establishing conservative, pro-business, "opportunity" policies within the Nation's urban areas.

But you'll never see positive change for the GOP as long as you have Bill O'Reilly on FOX calling black people lazy or promiscuous, and denying that white privilege exists.

Absolutely.

I think that if GOP rebrands itself like the Tories in the UK or the National Party in New Zealand, and focuses more on center-right policies(not theocracy/social conservatism), they can attract more votes from all demographics. Take the 'limited government' mantra to heart by ending the school-to-prison pipeline. The Tea Party is killing the GOP, and on the current track, it's likely that in 20 years time, as demographics change, the GOP will never win a national election again without fundamental change.

Again, no. That religious element is what drives conservative turnout, and if the GOP could get the black churches over to their side by coming up with some way to fight poverty that DOESN'T involve blaming blacks for being poor, then they'd have a powerful organizational weapon in America's thousands of evangelical churches that would make the Democratic Party's use of labor unions look anemic by comparison.

[The Black Forrest]

Again, no. That religious element is what drives conservative turnout, and if the GOP could get the black churches over to their side by coming up with some way to fight poverty that DOESN'T involve blaming blacks for being poor, then they'd have a powerful organizational weapon in America's thousands of evangelical churches that would make the Democratic Party's use of labor unions look anemic by comparison.

Question: Would you think the message is due to closet libertarians? I have heard a few go on about people not taking responsibility for themselves for being poor......

[Hakio]

The answer is...
(drumroll)


NO.

[The Orson Empire]

The GOP needs fundamental change that moderates some of its social conservative beliefs and stops supporting racism.

Those are two different things.

I think that it would be fatal for the GOP to abandon its Christian fundamentalist nature; it relies FAR too heavily on white evangelicals for its core support. What it needs to do is remain SOCIALLY conservative while finding a way to lose its racism; it needs to add BLACK evangelicals to its WHITE evangelical base. This is why I stress a message of black economic empowerment through the establishment of community-based business, and why I stress black political power in urban areas for the sake of establishing conservative, pro-business, "opportunity" policies within the Nation's urban areas.

But you'll never see positive change for the GOP as long as you have Bill O'Reilly on FOX calling black people lazy or promiscuous, and denying that white privilege exists.

Absolutely.

I think that if GOP rebrands itself like the Tories in the UK or the National Party in New Zealand, and focuses more on center-right policies(not theocracy/social conservatism), they can attract more votes from all demographics. Take the 'limited government' mantra to heart by ending the school-to-prison pipeline. The Tea Party is killing the GOP, and on the current track, it's likely that in 20 years time, as demographics change, the GOP will never win a national election again without fundamental change.

Again, no. That religious element is what drives conservative turnout, and if the GOP could get the black churches over to their side by coming up with some way to fight poverty that DOESN'T involve blaming blacks for being poor, then they'd have a powerful organizational weapon in America's thousands of evangelical churches that would make the Democratic Party's use of labor unions look anemic by comparison.

Please do not give the Republican Party any ideas. It would be horrific if they won this election.

[Atlanticatia]

Please do not give the Republican Party any ideas. It would be horrific if they won this election.

True. (GOP, ignore all advice. You're doing perfectly fine.)

[Atlantica]

Just saying from the GOP, Rand Paul is almost tied with Jeb Bush - however, I prefer the latter. He has strong points in immigration, as well as education, making him a very formidable candidate against the delusional Democrats. If he can overcome the 'Bush prejudice' among the populace, he can actually change the situation for the Republicans.

[Death Metal]

Please do not give the Republican Party any ideas. It would be horrific if they won this election.

True. (GOP, ignore all advice. You're doing perfectly fine.)

No need to worry. They responded to their mass BSOD two years ago by doing the same shit they've been doing, but louder.

There's no rudder for them anymore, their platform won't change until they're been doomed to obscurity.

[The Scientific States]

Just saying from the GOP, Rand Paul is almost tied with Jeb Bush - however, I prefer the latter. He has strong points in immigration, as well as education, making him a very formidable candidate against the delusional Democrats. If he can overcome the 'Bush prejudice' among the populace, he can actually change the situation for the Republicans.

The delusional democrats? Please, do elaborate your position.

[The Black Forrest]

Please do not give the Republican Party any ideas. It would be horrific if they won this election.

True. (GOP, ignore all advice. You're doing perfectly fine.)

Yes. Please do what you are doing. Keep that outreach to women going. Sure it's been going on for a 100 years but hey it will work eventually.

The hispanics? Don't worry they will come over. They will forget the immigration efforts after all.

Stay the course. Just don't worry about the inbound torpedoes!

[The Black Forrest]

Just saying from the GOP, Rand Paul is almost tied with Jeb Bush - however, I prefer the latter. He has strong points in immigration, as well as education, making him a very formidable candidate against the delusional Democrats. If he can overcome the 'Bush prejudice' among the populace, he can actually change the situation for the Republicans.

Hey look at that. You are taking from jebs playbook. Keep repeating the same nonsense.

Let's remind you.

That's because Bill Clinton was LUCKY - that was back when Capitalism 3.0 (those from Reaganomics and with the Trickle Effect) was one the highest points. Jeb Bush - sure, his father and brother might have been terrible, but when he was Governor of Florida, he was excellent in education and so on.

Nahh. I suspect people are tired of the Bush name.

Jeb has his own issues. Terri Schivo comes to mind. His education "reforms" well? He does like to paint a rosey picture.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ans ... ols-again/

[The Black Forrest]

Just saying from the GOP, Rand Paul is almost tied with Jeb Bush - however, I prefer the latter. He has strong points in immigration, as well as education, making him a very formidable candidate against the delusional Democrats. If he can overcome the 'Bush prejudice' among the populace, he can actually change the situation for the Republicans.

The delusional democrats? Please, do elaborate your position.

Duh. The Democrats don't understand the brilliance of the Republicans.

[Death Metal]

The delusional democrats? Please, do elaborate your position.

Duh. The Democrats don't understand the brilliance of the Republicans.

GOP campaign strategy in a nutshell:

"Okay, we opened by moving our king's bishop's pawn to f3. They moved their king's pawn to e5. Suggestions?"

"Hm... move our king's knight's pawn to g4."

"BRILLIANT! We'll totally crush them now!"

[Sebastianbourg]

I will be up front and say that I'm a die hard supporter of the Clintons. I understand that they are much too conservative for a lot of folks here on NSG,but for arguments sake lets say she locked up the Democratic nomination. Do you, NSG, feel that Rand Paul has a good chance of defeating her in the General? If not then which Republican do you think is up to the task?

Personally I think Paul's libertarian-moderate message will be fine and dandy and attract some young people and minorities. However, he will have to defend a fairly conservative voting record. Oh and let's not forget the Republican Primary. I think that in order to win the nomination, he will have to take some hawkish and socially conservative positions and, in doing so, will lose some of the ammunition he currently has against Hillary. If I'm correct, he likes to think of himself as a non-interventionists while Sec. Clinton is just the opposite.

He has absolutely no chances of even getting the Republican Party nomination! In any case I'm fairly certain most American liberal would prefer Hillary Clinton over Rand Paul even if she's not as liberal as the would like.

[Freiheit Reich]

Sorry to disappoint you but 9/11 was an inside job. Here are some words for thought if you are ready to leave your cave of denial and admit that some Americans leaders are not the heroes you thought they were:

http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_01.htm

http://rense.com/general57/aale.htm

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/911_a_hoax.htm

I'd say you just lost all credibility, but, well...

These 3 pictures can explain it all. Don't feel bad, over 50% of Americans reelected Bush.

The last is because Hillary fell for Bush's plan hook line and sinker and voted for the Iraq War, a voter for Hillary is a vote for immoral foreign invasions:

[Dyakovo]

I'd say you just lost all credibility, but, well...

These 3 pictures can explain it all. Don't feel bad, over 50% of Americans reelected Bush.

The last is because Hillary fell for Bush's plan hook line and sinker and voted for the Iraq War, a voter for Hillary is a vote for immoral foreign invasions:

Two cartoons and two meme pics don't prove anything.

[Ifreann]

These 3 pictures can explain it all. Don't feel bad, over 50% of Americans reelected Bush.

The last is because Hillary fell for Bush's plan hook line and sinker and voted for the Iraq War, a voter for Hillary is a vote for immoral foreign invasions:

Two cartoons and two meme pics don't prove anything.

That's what the Illuminati want you to think.

[Murkwood]

I'd say you just lost all credibility, but, well...

These 3 pictures can explain it all. Don't feel bad, over 50% of Americans reelected Bush.

The last is because Hillary fell for Bush's plan hook line and sinker and voted for the Iraq War, a voter for Hillary is a vote for immoral foreign invasions:

Godwin? Godwin.

[Dyakovo]

These 3 pictures can explain it all. Don't feel bad, over 50% of Americans reelected Bush.

The last is because Hillary fell for Bush's plan hook line and sinker and voted for the Iraq War, a voter for Hillary is a vote for immoral foreign invasions:

Godwin? Godwin.

I think it's rather telling when we're on the same side in a debate...

[Murkwood]

Godwin? Godwin.

I think it's rather telling when we're on the same side in a debate...

I guess 9/11 truthers actually are good for something.

[Jinwoy]

I think it's rather telling when we're on the same side in a debate...

I guess 9/11 truthers actually are good for something.

Please god help us all.

[Jocabia]

Those are two different things.

I think that it would be fatal for the GOP to abandon its Christian fundamentalist nature; it relies FAR too heavily on white evangelicals for its core support. What it needs to do is remain SOCIALLY conservative while finding a way to lose its racism; it needs to add BLACK evangelicals to its WHITE evangelical base. This is why I stress a message of black economic empowerment through the establishment of community-based business, and why I stress black political power in urban areas for the sake of establishing conservative, pro-business, "opportunity" policies within the Nation's urban areas.


Absolutely.


Again, no. That religious element is what drives conservative turnout, and if the GOP could get the black churches over to their side by coming up with some way to fight poverty that DOESN'T involve blaming blacks for being poor, then they'd have a powerful organizational weapon in America's thousands of evangelical churches that would make the Democratic Party's use of labor unions look anemic by comparison.

Please do not give the Republican Party any ideas. It would be horrific if they won this election.

It wouldn't be that horrific if they made the changes that ASB is suggesting. It would mean they'd have to stop disenfranchising, which is good, they'd have to stop promoting racism, which is good, and they'd have to support policies that empower the poor, which is good. That would be a huge shift in their policies that would move us in the right direction. If that happened, they'd have to work with liberals on these issues and we'd positive changes, while a fairly strong democratic party resists them on the other issues you or I might disagree with.