What Republican could possibly run for President next?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_(United_States)

Not a socialist party at all.

 

Yes it was.

- - - Updated - - -

Hahahahaha! Say good night Gracie.

 

Read this again.
You just made the point that people belonging to organizations that do not call themselves socialist because they don't conform to the definition of the word don't think of themselves in that way.
You call them socialist organizations.
They don't.
Why?
Because they understand what the word means.
Brilliant!

- - - Updated - - -

White flag noted.

 

Those people that were impressed voted for Obama and will vote Democrat next election. So what?

 

And that is the viewpoint which will likely mean Christie will not be re-elected, and whoever the Democrats nominates is.

So thank you.

 

And thank you for the new socialist state we seem to have become and for the perpetually crappy economy.

 

You know...I liked Romney until he went all Right Wing as he took some BAD ADVICE!!!

I mean here was the Republican Governor from Massachusetts who had the sense to bring in the best and brightest to design Romney Care and we have Universal Healthcare in Mass....AND A BUDGET SURPLUS and we get ZERO MONEY from the Feds to help us with the program.

He could have won just on that...but instead he went from Logical Republican Governor from Mass. who works with people on all sides...to IDIOT SPOUTING RELIGIOUS RIGHT IDEOLOGY!!!

To watch him fall so fast was disheartening.

AboveAlpha

 

America is not socialist and even if it was, socialist democrats didn't do this to the economy.

 

Everyone is voting Democrat next election, because the GOP thinks it can win on a hyper-right platform.

Hahahahaha

 

You did not make a compelling argument that America has not been made Socialist, nor did you convince me that it was not at the hands of the Democrats.

 

Its funny you think there is a GOP body selecting who will be the final candidate but the reality it is a process of election by actual people voting. The actual people will pick who the GOP puts forward. I hope the people vote for a Conservative candidate. But I think you are partially right. The people will likely vote by majority for the socialist candidate who gives them stuff.

 

Socialism (from Merriam Webster)

The government doesn't own the means of production and distribution of goods in our economy so I'm not understanding how it is socialist. Please enlighten me.

 

Some do. Some vote for Democrats because they just don't buy the hyper religious, racially charged, fear ridden ideology that *********s in the GOP are selling.

 

I see. Unlike the fear driven ideology of global warming.

 

That fear is backed up by mountains of scientific evidence. Even then, it is still a strong theory (but not a law!) with ~95% certainty.

Look, you can choose to "not believe" in global warming, but in doing so you discredit geology, chemistry, biology, physics, astronomy, and climatology. They are using methods that include fossil data and empirical data from all those fields.

 

Romney was a great candidate, who did very well with white males, as well as anyone could reasonably expect.
And Obama was burdened by a slow economy and relatively high unemployment, no president had ever been re-elected with economic numbers as bad as those of 2012. So you can see why people thought Romney was going to win.
But America isn't a white christian nation anymore, it's a conglomeration of races and cultures, and the minorities who have not only grown in number, but have grown in political activity. There are more of them and they vote in larger numbers. And GOP policy has been aimed at courting the racist vote as a part of it's Southern Strategy for almost 50 years. That worked for quite a few years, it increased the GOP share of the White vote, and even though it cost them minority votes, minorities didn't vote in large numbers. By activating minority voters, the Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of the last six presidential elections.
The rising demographic tide, bolstered by the revulsion at the Bush presidency, briefly gave the Democrats a supermajority that allowed them to put ObamaCare into the books as a law.
Eventually the GOP will adapt, it will re-message and appeal to minority voters, but it isn't doing that now, so I don't expect the rising tide to abate for a number of years. In 2016 the Democrats should do very well, they might end up with congress and the White House.
2014, I see as more of a push, what should have been a good year for Republicans has been neutralized by the shutdown.

 

Not believe in global warming? Sure I believe in global warming. I believe in global cooling too. It has happened over and over temperatures go up and down through the course of time and of course well before man ever existed. What I do not "believe" is this theory that man is causing a temperature change. Don't be such a sheep. Al Gore just wants some of your money and the scientists already have some of it and they do not want to give it back.

 

Oh that is way to simplistic. Romney got votes from women and other groups just not in great enough numbers to win. The election was a clear victory for Obama but do not delude yourself into thinking Obama won but some astronomical number. You Lefties keep wanting to make it about White or Christian or Male. The reality is that people voted for an ideological change towards centralized government because they thought it was going to benefit them. They are in for one big shockeroo.

 

Al Gore doesn't have enough money to bribe 99% of the world's scientists. Global warming and cooling trends happen over periods of 10,000 years and longer, not the 150 year rapid change we have observed from our historical records. You should do some reading on Milankovitch cycles. Maybe a category 5 hurricane needs to hit your hometown before it finally clicks with you. By then, global scientists will be at 99.9% certainty.

- - - Updated - - -

When you lose 60% of women, 70% of Asians and Jews, 80% of Latinos, and 96% of blacks, yes it is a white Christian Male thing.

- - - Updated - - -

The GOP needs to adapt quickly. Census projections for the next 30 years aren't pretty for the white christian male population...

 

It's not an internet poll. That poll is a phone poll done by Kelton Research for the National Geographic channel...and the Huffington Post, a very liberal source, considers it scientific enough to publish the results. Again, do you have a poll that says otherwise? You can't just say "you're wrong" and then when I give a source, tell me it's bad and not give one yourself.

And keep in mind, this is without Reagan even campaigning, since he's dead. If it had been Reagan instead of Romney, the GOP would still win by a landslide.

Again, I'm all for attracting minorities. I'm all for attracting anybody! I'm just trying to explain to you why we are still competetive in elections if such small portions of those groups vote GOP.

True. That's why we need to pick up minorities with somebody who can articulate our message! That's my point!

You sure are great at misinterpreting things. All I mean by significant is numerous.

Of course you are. How can you not see it? Visualize this:

Take yourself for a minute to, say, inner city Detroit. What do you see? Well, it's very run down. You see people on the streets smoking, many of them homeless. You walk up to a man to try to spark a conversation, and he can't speak proper English nor go two sentences without dropping an F-bomb. Then you see a teenage girl walking by, probably fourteen years old, and you notice her stomach is unusually large. She's pregnant. What kind of people are these? What demographic? Well, they are generally younger African Americans.

Taking a look at the area's statistics, you see that it has high crime rates, teen pregnancy rates, unemployment rates, dropout rates, and addiction rates that easily exceed that of most less developed countries. You also notice that median incomes are astonishingly low, as are student's school test scores. Most people are dependent on the government in one way or another.

Now take yourself to a Detroit city council meeting. You notice many of the seats are empty, one of which who belonged a councilmen who was ousted for having sexual relations with a 17 year old, and the other of which belonged to the mayor before it was discovered he stole tens of millions of dollars from the people of Detroit. Looking around the room, you notice a common theme: all of the nameplates, including the ones in the unoccupied places, have a (D) on them. The only exception to this rule is the cities emergency manager appointed by Governor Snyder. Looking further into this, you realize nearly all of the people who have been running Detroit for the last generation have had that (D) next to their name.

You began to wonder: If the Democrats are the party that will help the poor and minorities, and they've had control of this city for so long, why are they so much worse off then before? Every couple years, they show up to mark the "D" candidates on their ballots, and in exchange, what do they get? A virtually lifelong dependance on those people, and a generally low quality of life because of it. They continue to mark the "D" candidates for fear of losing those benefits after they've been put on them.

I have a word for being compelled to do something for fear of your already low quality food and shelter being taken away...it's called slavery!

The blacks of the inner city are on the Democrat's modern day planation...a vote plantation!

Lyndon Johnson said that he'd "have these [n-word]s voting Democrat for the next 200 years." I think we can prove him wrong.

This is what I mean by articulating the message. If conservatives can take the moral high ground and show people that, despite what Hollywood, the news, or Oprah may say about us, we aren't the evil raciest ones, and point our fingers at the party that really describes, we'll garner support from many people who wouldn't vote GOP before.

I AGREE, and I have said so already.

Fiscally conservative and socially liberal..so most are libertarians? Do you have some data to back that up? If that was true, you'd think the GOP wouldv'e won by a landslide because economy was by far considered the most important issue.

Uh, I think the attack on capitalism by Mr. The Private Sector's Doing Fine far worse then Romney's comment about something we all know is probably nearly true. Just saying.

I just noticed your elitist signature. Does it ever occur to you, if your little factoid their is true, that many of the very people you are offering to "help" don't want it?

 

The wacko birds who regard America's current dominant ideology as "Socialism!" must, in any rational comparative appraisal, place it quite low on the scale of advanced nations in that regard - well behind Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Israel, etc.

With Somalia as the alternative libertarian paradigm, where there is a conspicuous absence of government regulation and the personal liberty to amass an unlimited private arsenal, what they erroneously revile as "Socialism!" looks quite fetching to normal people.

 

In fantasy politics, FDR would have throttled the matinee idol soundly, but the current TPs would have denounced Gippy as a "RINO!" as well.

The reality was that Willard was the best the GOP could come up with, and he was easily defeated.

 

Minorities are receiving your message loud and clear; patronizing them by claiming they are not capable of getting it from those who are espousing it is counterproductive.

 

So you really think that the guy who invented ObamaCare was a good pick for the GOP? He'd alienated much of our base, and that's why we need a Rand Paul or Ted Cruz approach.

 

You keep thinking that's why the GOP lost...