What Is The Republican Path To Victory?

[Maryginia]

Honestly, If they want to win in 2016, they need to reform to Goldwater Republicans, They don't need to become Libertarians, but they do need to go back to Being Goldwater Republicans.

Right, because President Goldwater won such a resounding, one might almost say landslide victory in 1964. What they have to do is wake up from the fever dream that the Neo-Cons and the John Birch Society and Karl Rove foisted on the party. Wake up, realize that they're not going to ever become the only party in the nation and work toward making the country better instead trying to make themselves look better. Stop pandering to fools, work with their opponents - and I mean work, not the "my way or the highway" crap they've been calling compromise - and maybe they'll have a chance.

Voters Don't think the same as they did back then. If he ran and was alive today, he would have done well.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Right, because President Goldwater won such a resounding, one might almost say landslide victory in 1964. What they have to do is wake up from the fever dream that the Neo-Cons and the John Birch Society and Karl Rove foisted on the party. Wake up, realize that they're not going to ever become the only party in the nation and work toward making the country better instead trying to make themselves look better. Stop pandering to fools, work with their opponents - and I mean work, not the "my way or the highway" crap they've been calling compromise - and maybe they'll have a chance.

Voters Don't think the same as they did back then. If he ran and was alive today, he would have done well.

Libertarians aren't popular for a reason.

[Uieurnthlaal]

Accept defeat for the next ten years. They're trapped in a cycle in which all candidates either lose the general election or the primary, so they'll just have to wait long enough for the tea partiers to die out.

[Hurdegaryp]

Voters Don't think the same as they did back then. If he ran and was alive today, he would have done well.

Libertarians aren't popular for a reason.

Neckbeards and an average age of seventeen? A most unfortunate combination of factors, I'm sure.

[Beiluxia]

1. Don't look like an arsehole.
2. Don't sound like an arsehole.
3. Don't smell like an arsehole.
...
...
146. Appeal to everyone, not just your party base or those Tea Party wankers.

Edit: In other words......! There is a 6.9% chance that any of the above will happen, thus the Good Ol' Panties are probably doomed.

theres the problem, eh? the republican house members are all but guaranteed to be returned to office as long as they can get past their own primary. those districts have a lunatic base who insist on "the crazy" or they will put a crazy person in your place. either the non lunatic republicans don't care enough to vote in primaries or there just aren't enough of them to outweigh the lunatics.

that tars the national party as lunatics. in my mind for a good reason since the non-lunatic republicans don't have the power to bring the party back to sanity.

The lunatics are the most outspoken, therefore the most heard. Yet the GOP will not win in the long run with independents & moderates if it continues to suck up to the decreasing extremist minority that make up the Tea Party.

[Meryuma]

Ditching the Religious Right and becoming watered-down interventionist libertarians. Go from being extremely xenophobic to slightly xenophobic.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Ditching the Religious Right and becoming watered-down interventionist libertarians. Go from being extremely xenophobic to slightly xenophobic.

Would destroy the republican party.

Libertarianism isn't the solution here. Social conservatism and economic centrism, however, might well be.

[Vazdania]

To be entirely honest, I'd like to see both the Republican and Democratic Parties implode and be replaced by, like, six or seven others. What we REALLY need in this damn country, other than proper public transit, the elimination of bribery and corruption, and a revamping of the education system, is an actual multiparty democracy like they have in European countries.

Unfortunately our election system makes two parties the only stable division. It would be nice to switch to something like the french point system.

no it wouldn't. Multiparty systems like the UK would be much better.

[Luveria]

Ditching the Religious Right and becoming watered-down interventionist libertarians. Go from being extremely xenophobic to slightly xenophobic.

The religious right is their entire voter base.

[AiliailiA]

Unfortunately our election system makes two parties the only stable division. It would be nice to switch to something like the french point system.

no it wouldn't. Multiparty systems like the UK would be much better.

The UK electoral system isn't much different. I'm genuinely puzzled as to why they have 3 major parties now. It may be a transitional phase from which two major parties (perhaps neither of them Labor or Conservatives) emerge, or it may be the close and engaged prop-rep countries of Europe which voters are trying against the odds to emulate. Like I say, it puzzles me.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Ditching the Religious Right and becoming watered-down interventionist libertarians. Go from being extremely xenophobic to slightly xenophobic.

The religious right is their entire voter base.

And, see, that's the problem. They have to expand beyond that.

[New Corenea]

The Republican Party need some reforms within the party. They also need a good messenger

The Republican Party run on the platform on low income taxes, limited government, free market, and private individuality. It's a good message really.

Have Republicans as strict interpretators of the Constitution or be more libertarian

Reforms Republicans need:

-Change the chance on gay marriage. Instead of opposing gay marriage, state that the Constitution does not have any law refering to marriage. Go with the platform that government should stay out of marriage.

-Legalize at least medical usage of marijuana. Marijuana is to be supposedly the least harmful drug so why not?

-Abolish IRS and promote low income tax to all class. Most Americans hate the IRS and the 16th Amendment is technically never ratified. Plus if the Republicans promote low income tax to all class (from the low class to the 1% which still pays more even by the same percentage) the Democrats can't make the statement that the Republicans screw with the working class and the middle class.

-Be more secular but less secular than the Democrats. While promoting religious values, Republicans should stay away from following orders from churches. Go with the platform such as "I'm not a (insert religion here) running for President, I'm a Republican running for President.

-Urge blacks and hispanics to stay away from Democrats. Oppose affirmative action and welfare with this idea "Us Republicans see people as individuals, not based on race. We believe that a black student can do just as well or just as worse as a white student." Oppose welfare on the basis that welfare will only make the poor poor.

-Make it easier to become a citizen legally for legal immigrants of course, and issue work permits for illegals as guest workers.

-Oppose the Patriot Act. that will satisfy the libertarian wings

-Oppose corporatism because it goes against free market principles. Oppose government bailout and limit the powers of union by citing inproductitvity within unions. (Go Thatcher on unions)

-Support a candidate that have policies like Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan (the three greatest Republicans)




Or they can do the Democrat strategy and do the following:
-Accuse Democrats on the War Against Babies on abortion (like Democrats so-called War on Women)

-Blame Democrats for all the economic problems (Like Obama spent 1st term blaming Bush)

-Target liberal groups and claim that it's no big deal (Like Clinton on Benghazi and Lois Lerner claiming that she did nothing wrong)

-Bring up the race and gender card and accuse Democrats opposed to Republican Mia Love (a female black mayor of Saratoga Springs Utah) as racist and sexist (like a Democrat did due to oppositions to Obamacare)

-Accuse Democrats of race warfare (like Democrats accuse Republicans of class warfare)

-Have conservative media cry over liberals making fun of Rand Paul or some candidate but praise anti-Democrat humor by calling it satire and freedom of speech (CNN and MSNBC does it, why can't Fox?)

-Make Wall Street Movements as "Lazy Greedy Marxist Nazis" (Liberal news call Tea Party members as racists extremists)

Or Republicans can do what I mention above and don't do the Democrat tactic

[Luveria]

The religious right is their entire voter base.

And, see, that's the problem. They have to expand beyond that.

Then they would need to out-democrat the democrats.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And, see, that's the problem. They have to expand beyond that.

Then they would need to out-democrat the democrats.

Not necessarily. They can keep most of the religious right while reaching out to states' rights types, libertarians, and nanny-state skeptics.

[Luveria]

Then they would need to out-democrat the democrats.

Not necessarily. They can keep most of the religious right while reaching out to states' rights types, libertarians, and nanny-state skeptics.

Those could be a smaller gain than the amount of the religious right they would lose.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Not necessarily. They can keep most of the religious right while reaching out to states' rights types, libertarians, and nanny-state skeptics.

Those could be a smaller gain than the amount of the religious right they would lose.

I don't think so. Much could be gained by just putting some things on the back-burner, and making them states' rights issues, including the hot button social conservative ones. Abortion? Roe v. Wade was wrong because it should be a state decision. Gay marriage? Individual states should decide. Intelligent design curricula? State decision. The churches will eat it up. The only change is that you're selling it in the name of local control, and not religious extremism.

[Luveria]

Those could be a smaller gain than the amount of the religious right they would lose.

I don't think so. Much could be gained by just putting some things on the back-burner, and making them states' rights issues, including the hot button social conservative ones. Abortion? Roe v. Wade was wrong because it should be a state decision. Gay marriage? Individual states should decide. Intelligent design curricula? State decision. The churches will eat it up. The only change is that you're selling it in the name of local control, and not religious extremism.

Their voter base isn't concerned about local control. They are viciously hostile to abortion and same-sex marriage only for religious reasons.

[Indira]

Only thing I can think of is ditch the Tea Party and give it to Earl Grey

[AiliailiA]

I don't think so. Much could be gained by just putting some things on the back-burner, and making them states' rights issues, including the hot button social conservative ones. Abortion? Roe v. Wade was wrong because it should be a state decision. Gay marriage? Individual states should decide. Intelligent design curricula? State decision. The churches will eat it up. The only change is that you're selling it in the name of local control, and not religious extremism.

Their voter base isn't concerned about local control. They are viciously hostile to abortion and same-sex marriage only for religious reasons.

The idea is that they might be more accepting of abortion and same-sex marriage if it only happens in some other state.

With the Federal government out of those issues, there's no reason Republicans can't win a majority of the religious right voters at the federal level, for other policies. It's really unlikely that the religious right will vote Democrat just because Republicans aren't trying to force their "state values" on other states. They'll vote less and they'll be less enthusiastic with donations and campaigning, but they won't be lost entirely.

The problem with this plan is to reconcile the state Republican parties into something with national appeal. The state branches can bring back stoning and hold exorcisms in school for any kid who won't pray, only in a very few states. To be competetive at all in other states they must be more moderate. And if they give up states completely, there's no party machine there to get out their votes for a federal election or even stand candidates!

So do the state and federal parties split, perhaps taking different names? This might work at the state level but it would be doom at the federal level. Having no state base -- no geographical stronghold -- is one of the reasons Libertarians and Greens can't get their presidential vote out of the laughably-small range.

Perhaps Republicans (after this theoretical devolution to the states of religious-right issues) would still have a state base to help them at the federal level, by disavowing the 5 or 6 most theocratic state parties, but it's still a significant disadvantage because they'd be giving up non-religious-right supporters in those states. This "religious right base" we speak of is currently necessary for the Republicans to keep on-side or at least not changing sides, but it isn't the whole of their support anywhere. Cutting loose even one state party is bad for the numbers.

So I don't think letting the states handle the divisive 'religious right' issues is a good strategy. There's always lying I suppose: say they will return power to the states on those issues, try a bit knowing it won't happen, and never have to face the consequences. But really, a party strategy of "lie more" isn't a winner either.

Sorry about the rant. I'm trying to avoid something else I really should be doing ...

[Rhodesi]

Path to victory? Coup d'etat?

[Vazdania]

The Republican Party need some reforms within the party. They also need a good messenger

The Republican Party run on the platform on low income taxes, limited government, free market, and private individuality. It's a good message really.

Have Republicans as strict interpretators of the Constitution or be more libertarian

Reforms Republicans need:

-Change the chance on gay marriage. Instead of opposing gay marriage, state that the Constitution does not have any law refering to marriage. Go with the platform that government should stay out of marriage.

-Legalize at least medical usage of marijuana. Marijuana is to be supposedly the least harmful drug so why not?

-Abolish IRS and promote low income tax to all class. Most Americans hate the IRS and the 16th Amendment is technically never ratified. Plus if the Republicans promote low income tax to all class (from the low class to the 1% which still pays more even by the same percentage) the Democrats can't make the statement that the Republicans screw with the working class and the middle class.

-Be more secular but less secular than the Democrats. While promoting religious values, Republicans should stay away from following orders from churches. Go with the platform such as "I'm not a (insert religion here) running for President, I'm a Republican running for President.

-Urge blacks and hispanics to stay away from Democrats. Oppose affirmative action and welfare with this idea "Us Republicans see people as individuals, not based on race. We believe that a black student can do just as well or just as worse as a white student." Oppose welfare on the basis that welfare will only make the poor poor.

-Make it easier to become a citizen legally for legal immigrants of course, and issue work permits for illegals as guest workers.

-Oppose the Patriot Act. that will satisfy the libertarian wings

-Oppose corporatism because it goes against free market principles. Oppose government bailout and limit the powers of union by citing inproductitvity within unions. (Go Thatcher on unions)

-Support a candidate that have policies like Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan (the three greatest Republicans)




Or they can do the Democrat strategy and do the following:
-Accuse Democrats on the War Against Babies on abortion (like Democrats so-called War on Women)

-Blame Democrats for all the economic problems (Like Obama spent 1st term blaming Bush)

-Target liberal groups and claim that it's no big deal (Like Clinton on Benghazi and Lois Lerner claiming that she did nothing wrong)

-Bring up the race and gender card and accuse Democrats opposed to Republican Mia Love (a female black mayor of Saratoga Springs Utah) as racist and sexist (like a Democrat did due to oppositions to Obamacare)

-Accuse Democrats of race warfare (like Democrats accuse Republicans of class warfare)

-Have conservative media cry over liberals making fun of Rand Paul or some candidate but praise anti-Democrat humor by calling it satire and freedom of speech (CNN and MSNBC does it, why can't Fox?)

-Make Wall Street Movements as "Lazy Greedy Marxist Nazis" (Liberal news call Tea Party members as racists extremists)

Or Republicans can do what I mention above and don't do the Democrat tactic

I like this one...We get to blame democrats for things!!!

[Vazdania]

Not necessarily. They can keep most of the religious right while reaching out to states' rights types, libertarians, and nanny-state skeptics.

Those could be a smaller gain than the amount of the religious right they would lose.

Surely the religious right would NEVER vote Democrat, if the Republicans shifted slightly towards the center, it would upset the Religious right, but it wouldn't stop them from voting Republican.

[Disserbia]

Ditching the Religious Right and becoming watered-down interventionist libertarians. Go from being extremely xenophobic to slightly xenophobic.

God no. US foreign policy is fucking terrible, Republicans can do better than Democrats on that as long as they get rid of the warhawks

[Wikkiwallana]

The Republican Party need some reforms within the party. They also need a good messenger

The Republican Party run on the platform on low income taxes, limited government, free market, and private individuality. It's a good message really.

Have Republicans as strict interpretators of the Constitution or be more libertarian

Reforms Republicans need:

-Change the chance on gay marriage. Instead of opposing gay marriage, state that the Constitution does not have any law refering to marriage. Go with the platform that government should stay out of marriage.

-Legalize at least medical usage of marijuana. Marijuana is to be supposedly the least harmful drug so why not?

-Abolish IRS and promote low income tax to all class. Most Americans hate the IRS and the 16th Amendment is technically never ratified. Plus if the Republicans promote low income tax to all class (from the low class to the 1% which still pays more even by the same percentage) the Democrats can't make the statement that the Republicans screw with the working class and the middle class.

-Be more secular but less secular than the Democrats. While promoting religious values, Republicans should stay away from following orders from churches. Go with the platform such as "I'm not a (insert religion here) running for President, I'm a Republican running for President.

-Urge blacks and hispanics to stay away from Democrats. Oppose affirmative action and welfare with this idea "Us Republicans see people as individuals, not based on race. We believe that a black student can do just as well or just as worse as a white student." Oppose welfare on the basis that welfare will only make the poor poor.

-Make it easier to become a citizen legally for legal immigrants of course, and issue work permits for illegals as guest workers.

-Oppose the Patriot Act. that will satisfy the libertarian wings

-Oppose corporatism because it goes against free market principles. Oppose government bailout and limit the powers of union by citing inproductitvity within unions. (Go Thatcher on unions)

-Support a candidate that have policies like Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan (the three greatest Republicans)




Or they can do the Democrat strategy and do the following:
-Accuse Democrats on the War Against Babies on abortion (like Democrats so-called War on Women)

-Blame Democrats for all the economic problems (Like Obama spent 1st term blaming Bush)

-Target liberal groups and claim that it's no big deal (Like Clinton on Benghazi and Lois Lerner claiming that she did nothing wrong)

-Bring up the race and gender card and accuse Democrats opposed to Republican Mia Love (a female black mayor of Saratoga Springs Utah) as racist and sexist (like a Democrat did due to oppositions to Obamacare)

-Accuse Democrats of race warfare (like Democrats accuse Republicans of class warfare)

-Have conservative media cry over liberals making fun of Rand Paul or some candidate but praise anti-Democrat humor by calling it satire and freedom of speech (CNN and MSNBC does it, why can't Fox?)

-Make Wall Street Movements as "Lazy Greedy Marxist Nazis" (Liberal news call Tea Party members as racists extremists)

Or Republicans can do what I mention above and don't do the Democrat tactic

I like this one...We get to blame democrats for things!!!

The GOP has spent the last decade and then some telling those very lies. Apparently it's running out of steam, given the last election.

[Wikkiwallana]

Ditching the Religious Right and becoming watered-down interventionist libertarians. Go from being extremely xenophobic to slightly xenophobic.

God no. US foreign policy is fucking terrible, Republicans can do better than Democrats on that as long as they get rid of the warhawks

Aww, c'mon, who doesn't like an international dick waving contest?