- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Democratic long term strategy- brilliant!
Posted on 7/16/14 at 10:59 am to petar
Posted on 7/16/14 at 10:59 am to petar
quote:I admit it but honestly, I have no idea what they could do in the case of minorities. One party is all in with the "we'll give you shite from white people until we can't anymore" rhetoric. People like stuff they didn't earn. THAT is pure human nature and knows no racial lines. Short of Repubs just saying, "ok, we're on board with that crap too", what exactly could they do?
No one wants to admit the GOP has been terrible at attracting voters in recent memory?
quote:If by "alienate" you mean being the guys who say, "ya know, that policy by the folks who would suck your cocks for a week just to get your vote aint a good idea", then yeah. But again, what would you have them do?
No one wants to admit they have argued for policies that have alienated women, hispanics, african americans, and the younger generation?
quote:Restated, you could say until the GOP descides it will engage in the same stupidity that the Dems are willing to engage in for that vote.
Until the GOP looks at itself and realizes its part of the problem, it will continue to do poorly.
The GOP has basically two choices. Join in the dumb frick policies to appease minorities or not. I fail to see how either one does a damned thing to actually stop the dumb frick policies.
1
Posted on 7/16/14 at 11:00 am to deuceiswild
When the country goes under, and it will, who will get the blame?
Unless we quit spending like drunken sailors, we are going bankrupt very soon.
The first people to get blamed in a dire economy is immigrants.
When the country goes kaput and the healthcare becomes shyt, Dems will be history for a long time.
Vision is not your strong point.
Unless we quit spending like drunken sailors, we are going bankrupt very soon.
The first people to get blamed in a dire economy is immigrants.
When the country goes kaput and the healthcare becomes shyt, Dems will be history for a long time.
Vision is not your strong point.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 11:05 am to austingator
quote:
when they show up in the ER, they have to pay cash up front, or they are turned away.
ya right!
Posted on 7/16/14 at 11:28 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Join in the dumb frick policies to appease minorities or not.
I disagree.
1) come out in favor of state rights in war on drug and easing of national weed policies. Champion it as a fix to the racist profiling of African Americans and hispanics and a personal freedom issue. This would help with minorites and the youth.
2) Remove loud opposition to Roe v. Wade and loud support for Hobby Lobby. vote and keep candidates how every you want but loud support to things that women don't like is not a good idea.
3) support gay marriage through the removing of all marriage nation wide replacable by civil unions for all couples. Champion it as seperation of church and state and personal freedoms. Gay marriage is supported more than opposed nation wide. youth support it. Hispanics support it. African americans are supporting it in higher percentages. If the GOP came out in support of gay marriage in 2012, it would have won florida.
4) Call for ending of gerrymandering. Whether its true or not, minorities are terrified of gerrymandering. African Americans criticized the USSC for ending the important parts of the VRA.
5) Come out in favor of some sort of immigration plan. Include sealing the borders and path for citizenship for those who are here illegally but have not committed a crime and have an income. this could be just as stringent of a citizenship path as those trying to enter legally or more stringent. But having a plan would signify that you have answers and would not alienate hispanics. Plus, it would end those coming here to just for welfare.
6) Come out in favor of adding safety measure in school. Also come out against fully auto Assault rifles but include additional protections for a person's right to have rifles and handguns. Also have increased protection for right to carry your weapon.
doing this would take much out of the sails of the Dems. they would have very little to talk about on the emotional issues. These aren't dumb frick policies that are just for handouts. contrary to popular belief, there are plenty of hard working minorities that would vote GOP for the same reason you do.
I know some of these ideas wont be supported as others but a toning down of the rhetoric could help the GOP tons. I'm sure there are other ideas that are similar to these.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 11:34 am to petar
quote:Would have virtually zero effect on the minority vote.
1) come out in favor of state rights in war on drug and easing of national weed policies. Champion it as a fix to the racist profiling of African Americans and hispanics and a personal freedom issue. This would help with minorites and the youth.
quote:Did you know women are more likely to be pro-life than men?
2) Remove loud opposition to Roe v. Wade and loud support for Hobby Lobby. vote and keep candidates how every you want but loud support to things that women don't like is not a good idea.
quote:How is this related to minority voting?
3) support gay marriage through the removing of all marriage nation wide replacable by civil unions for all couples. Champion it as seperation of church and state and personal freedoms. Gay marriage is supported more than opposed nation wide. youth support it. Hispanics support it. African americans are supporting it in higher percentages. If the GOP came out in support of gay marriage in 2012, it would have won florida.
quote:Um. An end to gerrymandering would mean the removal of virtually every black face from congress. Yeah. THAT will help.
4) Call for ending of gerrymandering. Whether its true or not, minorities are terrified of gerrymandering. African Americans criticized the USSC for ending the important parts of the VRA
Not a damned think you mentioned will change the demographic reality one f'n iota. Hell. #4 would piss blacks off!!!
Posted on 7/16/14 at 11:48 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
Only you BHP!
I was wondering how that little snippet might come off to a blacker.
I was wondering how that little snippet might come off to a blacker.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 12:01 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Would have virtually zero effect on the minority vote
AA are in support of lessoning drug laws because many feel that laws are applied to them unfairly (and they kind of have a point if you looke up that statistics)
Hispanics feel very similarly
quote:
Did you know women are more likely to be pro-life than men
latest gallop polls show that 50% of women are pro-choice with 41% as prolife
44% of men are pro choice and 51% or pro life.
quote:
How is this related to minority voting?
Its not directly. Just a way for gop to help themselves. in latest polls, 55% of people think gay marriage should be valid by law. 78% of people under 30. 58% of independants. 63% of moderates. 58% of hispanics. 56% of asians. and showed rising interest amongst AA with gains of 12% across the board since 2004. and with those under 30% above 50% and those between 30-49 almost at 50%. Women are much more likely than men to support the issue. in 2012, 56% of women were likely to support compared to 42% of men.
so this would help with the center, the youth, minorities, women. Plus it would show an evolution of the party to adjust to new ideas.
quote:
An end to gerrymandering would mean the removal of virtually every black face from congress.
that is false. Most virtually all black district are due to geography rather than gerrymandering. there have been studies and reports done. Gerrymandering is an emotional issue of little substance in the modern era But that doesn't mean that AA's are terrified of it for good historic reason. There is a reason many AA decried the ending of the VRA. Either way this wasnt the point.
Dem's have sued Rep in Virginia, florida, missouri, nevada, and texas for racial gerrymandering. This gives them a racial narrative. you can easily take this away and suggest in the states that both parties sit down to find geographical ways to fix districts. It won't hurt the gop and will deflate the sails of the dem. To me its a no brainer.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 12:08 pm to petar
I like this platform. It is called compromise. Every interest group and minority group the Dems target would have many cross over voters that agree with the GOP on many issues.
Wouldn't even need to address unions or the GW crowd. Just these simple, common sense compromises you listed would change the game dramatically.
Wouldn't even need to address unions or the GW crowd. Just these simple, common sense compromises you listed would change the game dramatically.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 12:09 pm to deuceiswild
quote:
Painful to say this but among the younger generation, social issues are most important.
That's the genius of the Rep. strategy
Blacks will always vote block. Its a slavery thing. Latinos however, will mature. When they do, Republicans will switch them like they did with Reagans southern strategy
Voters are selfish. When older Latinos realize that the next generation is mostly irresponsible, social issues will quickly become pocketbook issues. Lower taxes, less welfare, local control
The dem strategy is the same as that of the Roman empire; increase the borders. We saw how that worked for them. It never works. Ever. Its just a matter of time
Posted on 7/16/14 at 12:19 pm to Dick Leverage
quote:
Wouldn't even need to address unions or the GW crowd. Just these simple, common sense compromises you listed would change the game dramatically.
I think so. i don't think you would have to give up what make the party what it is. less government in the bedroom and in the pocketbook. That's awesome. a Great idea and people like it. The sidetracking issues is where i think the GOP messes up.
On GW, the GOP could do a slight of hand called energy independence. This could be through more nuclear, using the resources we have in the fossil fuels, and use natural energy sources when available. Hell, Texas is the biggest user of wind energy in the country if not the world.
They could come out in support of more efficient cars. but against anything that adds government involvement or hurts the pocketbook of the consumer.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 12:45 pm to deuceiswild
quote:
Posted by deuceiswild So if you'd like a more direct answer....I'd say as a voting block, yes. Yes they are.
So anybody who disagrees with you politically is dumb? If thats your view, fair enough.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 1:00 pm to League Champs
quote:
Blacks will always vote block. Its a slavery thing.
they shouldn't give up on them as a whole. if the GOP could slowly start making progress and grow the brand, it could start to have some significance.
quote:
Latinos however, will mature
that's wierd.. take action now though before the democrats take a stronger foothole by being on the forefront of important issues to this class.
quote:
When older Latinos realize that the next generation is mostly irresponsible
lol that is part of the problem. many are quick to renounce a group through rhetoric. Most the younger generation is not irresponsible. just been dealt the biggest shite hand out of any generation in a while. cant all be born in a thriving economy when good jobs were a dime a dozen. There are no jobs for the younger generation because the older generations have taken the best country ever on earth and run it into the ground mainly because they don't know how to control spending. Housing crisis, huge credit card debt, huge national debt, etc. The younger generation has 0 to do with the mess we are in right now. can't say the same for the older generation.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 1:06 pm to petar
I'm just gona sit back, enjoy college sports, having sex with my wife, and stocking up on guns and ammo and watch this sucker burn to the ground, while shooting anybody who tries to take away the three things I am enjoying.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 1:07 pm to onmymedicalgrind
The angry reactionaries of the right are a big part of the Dems recent success. The TP's fatal flaw thus far is allowing any jackass to tap into that outrage by just saying what they want to hear. They've allowed the wrong people the microphone and the wrong people to become the face of the conservative base. The echo chamber makes them less willing to give an inch on any issue but far more damaging is how easy they are to marginalize. Palin. Bachmann. McDaniel. Ect...
It makes it easy for the Dems to play a few soundbites and get support from anyone who isn't the base. It's not very deep support, but strength of conviction isn't worth more votes. It's a PR problem.
A more measured approach with an eye for a candidate who can communicate the conservative message well is all they need. Romney and McCain weren't those people. The meme is they lost because they were centrists, but they really lost because they were poor candidates who couldn't connect with people. A guy with more charisma and a moderated position on social issues can and will win.
It makes it easy for the Dems to play a few soundbites and get support from anyone who isn't the base. It's not very deep support, but strength of conviction isn't worth more votes. It's a PR problem.
A more measured approach with an eye for a candidate who can communicate the conservative message well is all they need. Romney and McCain weren't those people. The meme is they lost because they were centrists, but they really lost because they were poor candidates who couldn't connect with people. A guy with more charisma and a moderated position on social issues can and will win.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 1:11 pm to beebefootballfan
quote:
I'm just gona sit back, enjoy college sports, having sex with my wife, and stocking up on guns and ammo and watch this sucker burn to the ground, while shooting anybody who tries to take away the three things I am enjoying.
aint nothing wrong with that
i think the GOP has a huge opportunity like the Dems had after GWB that they are not taking advantage of.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 1:12 pm to Duke
quote:
The meme is they lost because they were centrists, but they really lost because they were poor candidates who couldn't connect with people. A guy with more charisma and a moderated position on social issues can and will win.
this. good post
Posted on 7/16/14 at 1:16 pm to petar
quote:November will tell at least part of that tale.
i think the GOP has a huge opportunity like the Dems had after GWB that they are not taking advantage of.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 2:23 pm to petar
petar,
You make very little sense.
The original conditions of the Voting Rights Act encouraged gerrymandering along racial lines. I would go so far as to say that the VRA requires racial gerrymandering.
Many more minority-majority districts were formed in the wake of the act's passage (more so after a 1982 amendment), much to the delight of Democrats and their followers.
But lo and behold, Republicans figured out that these minority-majority districts could be used as a way to isolate those voters, and insulate their own districts, therefore lessening their overall impact.
So the idea of a "black House district" and a "Hispanic house district," which would otherwise make a liberal cream in his or her jeans, became BAAAAAAADDDD and EVILLLLL.
Democrats got what they wanted, but it didn't quite work out like they thought it would.
So now, they are doing a 180, and are against drawing districts that ensure minority representation because of said district's demographics. Right?
By the way, no part of the Voting Rights Act has been "repealed." Repeal is left up to legislatures.
Instead, the U.S. Supreme Court "struck down" the provision that the federal government can intercede in state elections affairs (elections are a state matter, not federal) in places with a history of discrimination... and must pre-clear changes with the U.S. Dept. of Justice.
Why did they strike it down? Because the basis of all this "discrimination" relies on statistics (voter turnout and registration data) from... wait for it... 1972.
Do you think it's fair to hold states and localities to statistics from 1972? Talk about punishing people for the sins of their fathers.
The Supreme Court went so far as to present an easy fix: UPDATE THE STATISTICS.
You, sir, are seriously misinformed, and a perfect Democrat dupe.
You make very little sense.
The original conditions of the Voting Rights Act encouraged gerrymandering along racial lines. I would go so far as to say that the VRA requires racial gerrymandering.
Many more minority-majority districts were formed in the wake of the act's passage (more so after a 1982 amendment), much to the delight of Democrats and their followers.
But lo and behold, Republicans figured out that these minority-majority districts could be used as a way to isolate those voters, and insulate their own districts, therefore lessening their overall impact.
So the idea of a "black House district" and a "Hispanic house district," which would otherwise make a liberal cream in his or her jeans, became BAAAAAAADDDD and EVILLLLL.
Democrats got what they wanted, but it didn't quite work out like they thought it would.
So now, they are doing a 180, and are against drawing districts that ensure minority representation because of said district's demographics. Right?
By the way, no part of the Voting Rights Act has been "repealed." Repeal is left up to legislatures.
Instead, the U.S. Supreme Court "struck down" the provision that the federal government can intercede in state elections affairs (elections are a state matter, not federal) in places with a history of discrimination... and must pre-clear changes with the U.S. Dept. of Justice.
Why did they strike it down? Because the basis of all this "discrimination" relies on statistics (voter turnout and registration data) from... wait for it... 1972.
Do you think it's fair to hold states and localities to statistics from 1972? Talk about punishing people for the sins of their fathers.
The Supreme Court went so far as to present an easy fix: UPDATE THE STATISTICS.
You, sir, are seriously misinformed, and a perfect Democrat dupe.
Posted on 7/16/14 at 9:11 pm to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So anybody who disagrees with you politically is dumb? If thats your view, fair enough.
I realize it's late, but...
Lolwut? Is that what you took from that reply? Really?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:10 am to texashorn
quote:
texashorn
I think you didn't read my post at all..
I said what the perception is. I did not state anything on why the USSC struck down the provisions. (sorry for using the wrong word as well.) or whether it was good or bad to strike down the provision. So whether the law was a dem idea or a republican idea or good or bad does not matter to my argument.
The perception by African Americans and other minority groups is that striking down the provisions of the VRA is a loss for them. Not saying anything to the validity of the statement. but that is a common perception by minority groups and is communicated by groups such as the NAACP.
Nearly immediately after the USSC ruled, republicans in Texas in North Carolina started try to reshape each state's map and pass more restrictive voter id laws. Immediately, Democrats and civil right groups cried out that this was discriminatory. AND have sought to introduce a new VRA bill which will apply to 8 states. all red states.
Here is what the Brennan Center stated that has been repeated by the NAACP:
quote:
According to a report by the Brennan Center for Justice, “In 2013 and 2014, at least 10 of the 15 states that had been covered in whole or in part by Section 5 introduced new restrictive legislation that would make it harder for minority voters to cast a ballot.
Many of these are long time red states and have GOP majorities in the state legislatures. These include North Carolina, Florida, Mississippi, Texas, etc.
The perception is not a good one and it is not helping attract minorities to the party. Plus to me, it is a needless position to take that is short sighted. It helps in the short term in winning elections, but in the long term, it prbly solidifies many minorities opposition to the GOP.
To me, why do any of this? instead of trying to "lessen their overall impact" why not try to attract this voter?
Plus it just gives ammo to the Democrats. One of my main points to my original post is that if the GOP can take the wind out of the sails of the Dem's on many emotional issues, they will begin to attract women, minorities, young people for the same reason they attracted you. Hard working people who want to keep their money. People who want less government. There are many people in my opinion who are voting Dem. who believe in these two huge GOP ideals mainly because their perception of the GOP.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News