What is the future of the Republican Party?

Saying the quiet part out loud again?

Why did Vivek pick age 25?

Because the POLLING for 18-25 shows that they vote BLUE and they have been turning out in RECORD numbers in the last 3 elections.

Furthermore another 12 million GenZ voters will be eligible in 2024 than there were in 2020.

That is a problem for Vivek and the GOP.

 

All good ideas.

 

Just more of RamaSwampy's so-called "good ideas" that are DOA.

 

What is the future of the democrat party. Even at this early stage they have little use for institutions that don't do things their way.
The constitution is just a feckless old rag.
Democrat president, corrupt DoJ, no Constitution, where does that leave the USA and its citizens?

 

Why?

 

What is the future of the Republican Part? Extinction so far as the person who wrote the OP is concerned, who claims that he is a person who admires Calvin Coolidge. He mocks what Calvin Coolidge stood for in nearly all of his posts. That’s why Coolidge is his avatar. If there is a person who stands for OP person’s politics, it’s Eugene B. Debs. Debs was an American socialist.

Ironically it’s Warren H. Harding, a Republican, who commuted Debs’ prison sentence which was imposed by Woodrow Wilson who was labeled as “progressive.” Wilson was a racist statist who was a forerunner for the World Federalist Movement. Wilson enjoyed a screening of Birth of a Nation in the Whitehouse, much to the displeasure of African-American groups at the time.

 

I think the former GOP will be like the Prohibition Party or the Flat Earthers by 2028 or 2032. A sad end but they were never much use anyway.

 

They were of use. They were the controlled opposition that gave the voters a belief that the uniparty offered them a choice.
Who is out there to have the positions:
1) The US workers should be seeing their wages rise.
2) The US has a right to secure borders. A wall doesn't mean "stay out". It says, "knock first and we'll decide if we want to let you in or not."
3) Judges should be able to tell you what a woman is.
4) America: a nation, not an empire. Time to stop entangling ourselves in foreign wars and finally enjoy that peace dividend.
5) Question big science. We've now incentivized them to create crisises for them to charge us to curb the harm done that they create.
6) Sound energy policy.
7) Protect US life, liberty and property. Respect the protections afforded us by the US Constitution including free speech and gun rights, including the right to use those gun when reasonable and necessary to use them to protect yourself and others' lives, liberty AND PROPERTY.
Reduce our dependence upon "credentials" gleaned only from attending accredited institutions. In the information age, there are many ways to train oneself to work.
The real question is, after Trump, who could die any millisecond now (I saw him with Tucker. He's not as bad off as dementia Joe, but he is sounding his age) and what follows? Will the Republicans return to being nothing but a nose picking club for wealthy elites? It is posited that there has been a shift and it isn't going away. Whether Mitch McConnel (also dying of old age) likes it or not, the Republicans are, I think, going to be the home for those who want freedom, prosperity and an end to never ending wars.

 

Yes, the Republican Party was useless in the mid 19th century when Democrat presidents, Franklin Piece and James Buchanan, were looking to not just maintain slavery but spread it to other areas. Standing the way of the spread a slavery was definitely anti-social activity.

 

The statistics you quote indicate to me that a new centrist party could have widespread support.

 

There’s the huge problem that Republicans and Democrats write our election laws. They do so as a mutual protection act. If there’s on thing both major parties agree on, it’s that no viable third party will ever rise. Then there’s the financial aspect. Money flows into the two major parties’ coffers, none into any third party. Biden raised and spent 1.6 billion dollars in 2020, Trump 1.1 billion, in third place was poor Libertarian Jo Jorgensen raising and spending less than 3 million. $2,930,266 to be exact.


https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race


You can’t be competitive or viable being out raised and spent 3.7 billion to less than 3 million. Then there’s the media attention which totally ignores third party candidates. There’s a lot to be overcome, the above are just two major problems. You also have ballot access, Republicans and democrats receive automatic ballot access. Independent and third-party candidates must jump through a million and one hoops just to get on the ballot. The two major parties use all the shenanigans they can to keep any third-party candidate off the ballot.


The majority of Americans may be ready for and want a viable third party, maybe even a fourth. But you can be sure the two major parties aren’t about to let or cede their monopoly on our two-party election system. Especially since they write our election laws, run and oversee the elections. Even though 56% of all Americans don’t think Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job of representing them or that the two major parties do such a poor job that a third major party is needed, you won’t see one arise.

 

Of course Schlapp's CPAC is imploding, Schlapps a Trump-humper.
This years CPAC Confrence also had the worst attendance ever.
Par for the course.

'CPAC Imploding - CPAC vice chair resigns amid turmoil'

'The vice chair of the Conservative Political Action Coalition has resigned from his longtime position on the organization’s board and is calling for investigations into the group’s top leader and its financial practices, among other issues.

Charlie Gerow, an attorney and communications executive who has served on the board of CPAC and its parent organization, the American Conservative Union, for nearly two decades, submitted his letter of resignation on Friday.

“The situation at CPAC has become such that I felt compelled to resign,” Gerow said when reached afterward.


Gerow’s resignation follows months of turbulence at the prominent conservative organization, where Chair Matt Schlapp earlier this year was sued by a former Herschel Walker Senate campaign staffer over allegations of sexual assault. Board member and treasurer Bob Beauprez resigned from his position in May, citing concerns over the organization’s financial reports, while Randy Neugebauer and Mike Rose also stepped down from the board earlier this year.

Just last week another board member, Timothy Ryan, also resigned, according to a person with knowledge of the organization’s operations. Ryan’s resignation has not previously been reported.'

interesting read in here.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/25/cpac-vice-chair-resigns-amid-turmoil-00113078

 

And yet, when I get my ballot, there are usually choices from the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, and the Green Party. They manage to get on the ballot. I think they don't do well because they are sort of fringe or niche parties. But if they can manage it, I would think a centrist party could do it. What it would need is a charismatic leader, and even if support for it came gradually, at some point the media would not be able to ignore it.

Let's imagine that in the next election our choices were Trump, Biden, and some pair of moderate, independent minded, charismatic leaders with a positive message. I think they could get votes from some Republicans, some Democrats, and a large majority of Independents.

 

It’s hard to tell until it happens. Which brings us back to the no label party. Could a Manchin and Hogan or someone like them attract enough votes to become relevant. Again, it probably depends not only on ballot access, but the amount of money raised. Chances are both Biden and Trump will have around 2 billion dollars per each of them to spend. The media will be all over them, could a no labels party with a couple of moderates, one from each party be attractive? Could they draw enough media attention to be taken seriously? Would they be allowed into the presidential debates? Back in 2016 the now so-called bipartisan debate commission raised the bar from polling 10% to 15% to get into the presidential debates when Johnson seemed to come within reach of the 10% threshold. Those debate should have never been taken from the League of Woman’s Voters. But the League made the mistake of allowing Perot into the 1992 presidential debates. The two major parties vowed never to let that happen again. It seems to me both major parties are scared to death of a third party becoming viable or a threat to them.


I’ve been through all of this twice before with Perot and know how hard it is to constantly fight both major parties. They gang up on you. But as usual when it comes to politics, it all boils down to money. Having enough money to get your name recognized, something Perot didn’t have to do. Having enough money to get your message out as the MSM will do their best to ignore you. The big mega money donors ignore you and give all their cash to the two major parties. You have an organization for form in all 50 states which takes time and money along with attaining ballot access which the requirements differs from state to state, 50 different laws and thresholds to meet. The problems go on and on. But one can hope.

 

You spurred me to look up the No Labels organization. I perused their website. I'm impressed by their goals.

https://www.nolabels.org/

 

I wish them well.

 

The main culprit is the 'winner take all' rules most states have now. A 'third party' should maybe start campaigns to repeal those first and get proportional representation back as a prelude? There are disadvantages to that as well, given how strong hardcore racists are in black and latino 'communities'.

 

I have no problem with the winner take all. That is if the winner receives a majority of the vote. 50% plus one. If no candidate receives a majority, then do like Maine and Nebraska do. Go to giving the winner of each congressional district that district electoral vote with the winner via plurality getting the 2 electoral votes for the state or senators. This change each state could do if they wanted to.


Proportional representation or mult-member districts, Georgia use to have them for the office of county commissioners, state legislatures etc. 20-30 years ago until the SCOTUS ruled them unconstitutional. Mandating single member districts which led to the republicans taking control of Georgia’s state legislature for the first time ever in 2002. There had never been a republican governor or a republican controlled state legislature in Georgia’s history since the civil war until 2002.


Winning most of the close races can give the winning party many more seats than what the total vote or percentage of the vote would indicate they should have. But having proportional voting for the house would eliminate gerrymandering. Example Georgia again, republicans received a very slight majority of the congressional vote in 2022, yet because of the single member districts hold a 9-5 republican advantage in our congressional districts. If going by proportional results, it would be 7-7. You wouldn’t be voting for a single congressman, but for a slate from both major parties. If the house was divided proportionally via the vote total using 2022 figures, the Republicans would have 220 seats, the democrats 208, independents or other political parties 7. This is based on the final vote tally of Republicans 50.6%, Democrats 47.8%, independents and or third party’s 1.6%

 

Far from becoming extinct, I expect the Republican Party to recover.

You can sing the praises of Eugene Debbs if you wish.

This may allow you to understand and appreciate Coolidge better.

 

I guarantee that your far left positions would have been an athema to Calvin Coolidge who once said, “The business of America is business.” He would not have approved of your support for those who advocate for ever expanding government and rewards to businesses which receive special treatment from government who support the state’s policies unquestionably.

You remind me of what I thought went I was a sophomore in college. I thought Fabian Socialist, George Bernard Shaw, was cool. Later I learned what he was.

 

I'm glad you finally learned something. Sidney and Beatrice were a hoot, weren't they?

In regard to his legacy, Coolidge's greatest contribution to the nation may well have been his appointment of Harlan Fiske Stone to the Supreme Court, vital to the passage of the progressive policies of FDR that allowed Americans to endure and recover from the Great Depression, but you should not ignore his support for women's suffrage, wage and working hours legislation, the equal-time rule that specified that broadcast stations must provide equivalent access to competing political candidates, and his opposition to child labor.

At a time when racial discrimination and lynching were rampant in parts of America, Coolidge supported the civil rights of African Americans. In his first State of the Union address, he expressed the enlightened view that the rights of Black Americans were "just as sacred as those of any other citizen" under the U.S. Constitution, and that it was a "public and a private duty to protect those rights."

Coolidge championed tolerance as an American value, and thanked immigrants for their contributions to U.S. society, saying that they had "contributed much to making our country what it is." He signed into law The Indian Citizenship Act, finally enfranchising all Native Americans.

He was an eminently decent man, the self-effacing antithesis of the blustering blowhard in vogue in Republican circles of late.

Your propounding what you claim to be my policy positions is alway an amusing revelation, of course.

 

You sell Coolidge short. See [https://www.northeastern.edu/sei/2017/02/the-business-of-america-is-business/]

 

No, I’m not turning him into another Franklin Roosevelt as you are attempting to do.

 

Of course, I never tried to turn Coolidge into another Franklin Roosevelt, and you know that.

 

According to your link, Coolidge favored

- Old age pensions, Social Security - How do you pay for it when the demographic goes to too many old people?
- Health care paid for by whom?
- Tells the mill owners the wages they should pay.

In general, Dukakis called him “a progressive.” That would have news to voters in the 1920s