Page 1 of 65

The State of the Republican Party Post-2017

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 2:50 pm
by Northern Davincia
Simply put, the GOP has been battered since the recent election cycle of late 2017, but arguably since 2015 as well.

The party's identity shifted greatly in the final months of Obama's presidency, generally swerving away from standard conservatism and delving straight into right-populism. Hopes for immigration reform were traded for wholesale deportation. Expansion in global trade and support of democracy in the world was pushed aside for isolationism. Repealing the ACA became "repeal and replace". The reasons for this transition are rather complex, as the underlying sense of dissatisfaction and anger had been slowly rising for decades, only to burst when Donald Trump came onto the scene. Unsurprisingly, the loss of Reince Priebus spelled doom for Republicans garnering an effective strategy to either win new seats or retain old ones. Furthermore, the association between Republican politicians and Trump himself was proven to be a toxic relationship in the eyes of voters.

Katie Glueck described the unfamiliar climate that the GOP must now navigate if it wishes to survive in the future.
For Republicans, who have won all of the marquee special congressional elections of the Donald Trump era to date, Tuesday's results across the country were a reminder that Democrats are, in fact, capable of translating liberal anti-Trump energy into actual votes. It was evidence of the environmental perils that often await a president's party in the midterm elections - especially when the president has historically low approval ratings.

Source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... spartanntp

Despite controlling the federal government, it is entirely possible that Republicans will continue to lose at the local level as Democrats did under Obama. Without a unifying force to either gather around or oppose, the party's innumerable splinter groups have begun openly fighting each other. Moderates, neoconservatives, libertarians, the aforementioned populists, and the religious right that previously aided Ronald Reagan's ascent to the White House no longer have the same charismatic leaders to follow. For Democrats, the emphasis on diversity has benefited it greatly. However, the GOP primarily (and increasingly) relies on white rural voters and this fact of demographics partially contributed to Mitt Romney's loss in 2012 and Trump's failure to earn the popular vote.

At the federal level, it says, the party is “marginalizing itself,” and, in the absence of major change, “it will be increasingly difficult for Republicans to win a presidential election in the near future.” Young voters are “rolling their eyes at what the party represents.” Voters’ belief that “the G.O.P. does not care about them is doing great harm.” Formerly loyal voters gathered in focus groups describe Republicans as “ ‘scary,’ ‘narrow-minded’ and ‘out of touch’ and that we were a party of ‘stuffy old men.’ ”

https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ... sy-report/

In my honest opinion, the RNC has an obligation to do some soul-searching. They can bask in the victories they accomplished in 2016, but those memories are fading fast as the Democratic Party revitalizes itself. Reform to the party agenda is crucial. More needs to be done to spread the conservative message to minorities, women, and the college-educated. Additionally, there needs to be a greater acceptance of science. At the moment, I see no indication that party officials are willing to undertake this challenge. While I do not believe that the Republican Party will collapse, it will become irrelevant if it stays the course it travels on now. Only time will tell if a new coalition will take shape in the future.

What say you, o NSG? Do you think that the GOP can recover, or will it simply fade away?

Poll History
Abraham Lincoln: 49 (26%)
Ulysses S. Grant: 4 (2%)
William McKinley: 1 (1%)
Theodore Roosevelt: 51 (27%)
Calvin Coolidge: 16 (8%)
Dwight Eisenhower: 17 (9%)
Gerald Ford: 2 (1%)
Ronald Reagan: 28 (15%)
George H.W.: Bush 1 (1%)
Donald Trump: 20 (11%)

Hannibal Hamlin: 4 (10%)
William A. Wheeler: 0 (No votes)
Levi P. Morton: 0 (No votes)
Charles W. Fairbanks: 1 (2%)
Charles G. Dawes: 1 (2%)
Charles Curtis: 2 (5%)
Nelson Rockefeller: 10 (24%)
Dan Quayle: 5 (12%)
Dick Cheney: 5 (12%)
Mike Pence: 14 (33%)

Chuck Norris: 22 (13%)
Arnold Schwarzenegger: 47 (28%)
Charlton Heston: 6 (4%)
Clint Eastwood: 32 (19%)
Dwayne Johnson: 27 (16%)
Gene Simmons: 2 (1%)
Sylvester Stallone: 8 (5%)
Kid Rock: 5 (3%)
Jenna Jameson: 4 (2%)
Bruce Willis: 14 (8%)

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 3:46 pm
by Keldros
I think the RNC is pretty far from burning. They've played a crucial role in gaining over 1000 political seats at the expense of Democrats, including capturing both chambers of Congress. It also was vital to winning all the special elections. It has almost 50 million dollars cash in hand and no debt while its competitor, the DNC, has less than 10 million cash in hand and almost 4 million in debt. The RNC is also setting all time records with small donors in total donations and total amounts donated.

It's unreasonable to think that the Democrats would get BTFO all the time. They've been getting walloped on the national stage at every level of government for the better part of a decade. Eventually there was going to be a return to the mean. Ed Gillespie was a lame candidate and the incumbent party in the White House and Congress historically loses state level seats.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 3:57 pm
by Major-Tom
It's very much like the Dems under the first two years of Obama, lots of losses on the local level. In 2018, I expect the Dems to pick up the House but the GOP to retain the Senate. That's about all I can say for now.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:28 pm
by Northern Davincia
Major-Tom wrote:It's very much like the Dems under the first two years of Obama, lots of losses on the local level. In 2018, I expect the Dems to pick up the House but the GOP to retain the Senate. That's about all I can say for now.

Would the nature of the Trump administration create any anomalies that did not appear with Obama?

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:33 pm
by Zurkerx
To put it in perspective, in the short term, the GOP will have to keep throwing red meat to its base, given that despite the President's unpopularity, 75%+ of Republicans support him and his views. However, in the long term, the party needs to change and the establishment to an extent knows this. If they don't, the changing demographics will hinder them from accomplishing anything and have them cease to exist.

I suspect the party will change but, whether that's for the better is debatable.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:35 pm
by Valrifell
Northern Davincia wrote:
Major-Tom wrote:It's very much like the Dems under the first two years of Obama, lots of losses on the local level. In 2018, I expect the Dems to pick up the House but the GOP to retain the Senate. That's about all I can say for now.

Would the nature of the Trump administration create any anomalies that did not appear with Obama?


The nature of the Trump administration has a healthy chance of making things worse for Republicans.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:37 pm
by Washington Resistance Army
Major-Tom wrote:It's very much like the Dems under the first two years of Obama, lots of losses on the local level. In 2018, I expect the Dems to pick up the House but the GOP to retain the Senate. That's about all I can say for now.


Tbqh I just really don't see the GOP losing the House.

Dems gaining a few seats sure, but a majority seems like wishful thinking.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:40 pm
by Albrenia
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Major-Tom wrote:It's very much like the Dems under the first two years of Obama, lots of losses on the local level. In 2018, I expect the Dems to pick up the House but the GOP to retain the Senate. That's about all I can say for now.


Tbqh I just really don't see the GOP losing the House.

Dems gaining a few seats sure, but a majority seems like wishful thinking.


I'd agree, but I thought that the recent elections were going to be another Dem fuckup so I dunno. Could be people are finally getting the message that Trump and his fellows shouldn't be trusted with a rubber ducky let alone the most powerful position on Earth.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:43 pm
by Washington Resistance Army
Albrenia wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Tbqh I just really don't see the GOP losing the House.

Dems gaining a few seats sure, but a majority seems like wishful thinking.


I'd agree, but I thought that the recent elections were going to be another Dem fuckup so I dunno. Could be people are finally getting the message that Trump and his fellows shouldn't be trusted with a rubber ducky let alone the most powerful position on Earth.


Well, Jersey had no chance of the GOP winning because, ya know, Christie.

VA I did expect and was kinda hoping for the GOP to win but their candidate was pretty sucky so it's not too shocking they lost that.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:44 pm
by Telconi
Albrenia wrote:
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Tbqh I just really don't see the GOP losing the House.

Dems gaining a few seats sure, but a majority seems like wishful thinking.


I'd agree, but I thought that the recent elections were going to be another Dem fuckup so I dunno. Could be people are finally getting the message that Trump and his fellows shouldn't be trusted with a rubber ducky let alone the most powerful position on Earth.


I think it's a to part thing though. You need to send the message that Trump sucks, but simultaneously send the message that you are better. I think the Dems are overplaying the first hand, while the republicand work to undermine the second part. Trading bad for also bad doesn't motivate anyone

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:45 pm
by Telconi
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Albrenia wrote:
I'd agree, but I thought that the recent elections were going to be another Dem fuckup so I dunno. Could be people are finally getting the message that Trump and his fellows shouldn't be trusted with a rubber ducky let alone the most powerful position on Earth.


Well, Jersey had no chance of the GOP winning because, ya know, Christie.

VA I did expect and was kinda hoping for the GOP to win but their candidate was pretty sucky so it's not too shocking they lost that.


Any Republican governor attempt in NJ was just going to cause PTSD bridge closure flashbacks anyhow.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 4:46 pm
by Northern Davincia
Washington Resistance Army wrote:
Albrenia wrote:
I'd agree, but I thought that the recent elections were going to be another Dem fuckup so I dunno. Could be people are finally getting the message that Trump and his fellows shouldn't be trusted with a rubber ducky let alone the most powerful position on Earth.


Well, Jersey had no chance of the GOP winning because, ya know, Christie.

VA I did expect and was kinda hoping for the GOP to win but their candidate was pretty sucky so it's not too shocking they lost that.

Saying that the VA candidate sucked is an overstatement.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:06 pm
by Trumptonium
Northern Davincia wrote: More needs to be done to spread the conservative message to minorities, women, and the college-educated


Trump won the white millenial 18-24 group including those within this group that were college educated, nationwide. Romney - and McCain - did not.

Just thought I'd mention.

Also the progress it's slow, what you've done is overhype everything. Trump/GOP is not reliant on white rural voters. Merely look at Rhode Island - highest GOP vote share since 1988 including the first win of a county in the state since 1988. Also the Rust Belt is not full of white rural voters, to the contrary. Same thing in Connecticut - Trump won a county that hasn't been touched by GOP since Bush I. Need I mention the EC seat in Maine?
Clearly appeal is not limited to Rural White Hinterland.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:11 pm
by MERIZoC
Simply put, the GOP has been battered since the recent election cycle of late 2017, but arguably since 2015 as well.


lol what

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:17 pm
by Northern Davincia
MERIZoC wrote:
Simply put, the GOP has been battered since the recent election cycle of late 2017, but arguably since 2015 as well.


lol what

Long-term damage. A short-term high is all well and good, but we both know that Trump has done irreparable harm.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:21 pm
by MERIZoC
Northern Davincia wrote:
MERIZoC wrote:
lol what

Long-term damage. A short-term high is all well and good, but we both know that Trump has done irreparable harm.

I doubt that very much. Trump hasn't deviated from standard GOP policy, and the people that usually support that shit will continue to support it, save for about 20 conservative pundits who whine about "respectability". The ball is entirely in the Democrat's court to see if they can do something to change things.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:28 pm
by Trumptonium
Northern Davincia wrote:
MERIZoC wrote:
lol what

Long-term damage. A short-term high is all well and good, but we both know that Trump has done irreparable harm.



this argument rests on the belief that demographic change at the ongoing rate is irreversible

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:31 pm
by MERIZoC
Trumptonium wrote:
Northern Davincia wrote: More needs to be done to spread the conservative message to minorities, women, and the college-educated


Trump won the white millenial 18-24 group including those within this group that were college educated, nationwide. Romney - and McCain - did not.

Just thought I'd mention.

Also the progress it's slow, what you've done is overhype everything. Trump/GOP is not reliant on white rural voters. Merely look at Rhode Island - highest GOP vote share since 1988 including the first win of a county in the state since 1988. Also the Rust Belt is not full of white rural voters, to the contrary. Same thing in Connecticut - Trump won a county that hasn't been touched by GOP since Bush I. Need I mention the EC seat in Maine?
Clearly appeal is not limited to Rural White Hinterland.

Rhode Island isn't white and rural? :blink:

I mean I suppose it comes down to your definition of rural, but I don't think anyone would argue that small towns aren't part of the traditional GOP base

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:32 pm
by Albrenia
I'll be waiting for at least one or two more big Dem victories before I'll be convinced of the change of momentum, but here's hoping.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:33 pm
by Keldros
Northern Davincia wrote:Long-term damage. A short-term high is all well and good, but we both know that Trump has done irreparable harm.


Dr. President Donald J. Trump is the beginning of a once in a lifetime political realignment. Even if he'd lost last year, we'd have gotten a nationalist/populist president eventually. I said in another thread that people used to make jokes about how the Republican Party was too white and minorities who voted Republican were voting against their own interests. Over the next 8 years, people will make similar jokes about white people who vote Democratic.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:35 pm
by Yami-Chan
That racist party that wants to bring back slavery, genocide, and gender discrimination will be dissolved by force. When all these old racist whites die off they'll crumble when they see nobody loves them.

Good riddance

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:36 pm
by MERIZoC
Keldros wrote:
Northern Davincia wrote:Long-term damage. A short-term high is all well and good, but we both know that Trump has done irreparable harm.


Dr. President Donald J. Trump is the beginning of a once in a lifetime political realignment. Even if he'd lost last year, we'd have gotten a nationalist/populist president eventually. I said in another thread that people used to make jokes about how the Republican Party was too white and minorities who voted Republican were voting against their own interests. Over the next 8 years, people will make similar jokes about white people who vote Democratic.

lol as if the Republicans haven't had loads of white chauvinist presidents already

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:37 pm
by Keldros
Yami-Chan wrote:That racist party that wants to bring back slavery, genocide, and gender discrimination will be dissolved by force. When all these old racist whites die off they'll crumble when they see nobody loves them.

Good riddance


1980: Cheap labor is good for the economy.
2000: America is a nation of immigrants.
2017: LOL white people ur all gonna disappear

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:37 pm
by Trumptonium
MERIZoC wrote:
Trumptonium wrote:
Trump won the white millenial 18-24 group including those within this group that were college educated, nationwide. Romney - and McCain - did not.

Just thought I'd mention.

Also the progress it's slow, what you've done is overhype everything. Trump/GOP is not reliant on white rural voters. Merely look at Rhode Island - highest GOP vote share since 1988 including the first win of a county in the state since 1988. Also the Rust Belt is not full of white rural voters, to the contrary. Same thing in Connecticut - Trump won a county that hasn't been touched by GOP since Bush I. Need I mention the EC seat in Maine?
Clearly appeal is not limited to Rural White Hinterland.

Rhode Island isn't white and rural? :blink:

I mean I suppose it comes down to your definition of rural, but I don't think anyone would argue that small towns aren't part of the traditional GOP base


I mean, we're talking about suburbia at most, here. This is the Boston commuter belt, in the same way much of western suburban Connecticut is NYC commuter belt.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:38 pm
by Keldros
MERIZoC wrote:Trump hasn't deviated from standard GOP policy,


lolwut